MetaFilter posts tagged with Republicans and GWB

''An organization's endorsement means nothing if it does not have to be earned.''

reklaw — Wed, 08 Sep 2004 13:51:00 -0800

Log Cabin Republicans Vote to Withhold Endorsement from President Bush.

Will the real conservatives please stand up.

Bag Man — Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:15:44 -0800

Pat Buchanan has realsed a new book called "Where the Right went Wrong" just in time for the Republican National Convention. The politics of war in the U.S. must make strange bedfellows if Pat Buchanan, Lou Rockwell and more recently Rep. Doug Bereuter of Nebraska can have anything in common with Moveon.org and Common Dreams. What does it mean for such a notable Republican to publish an anti-war book and be this critical of President Bush? Will moderate Republicans stay at home, vote third party or even switch to John Kerry? A growing trend or blip on the radar? [More inside]

Decline the Nomination

daver — Sat, 10 Apr 2004 16:03:27 -0800

Frustrated Republicans: President on vacation while Iraq burns got you down? Feeling loyal to the party, ideas, or repulsed by the Dems? Agonizing over voting Bush to stay true? Sign the petition, Maybe you won't have to. And Dems, if you can promise to be open minded in November you can sign as well. via Blogging of the President

Getting Evangelicalism All Wrong

marcusb — Sat, 10 Apr 2004 09:48:24 -0800

How the left's fear of a right-wing Christian conspiracy gets George W. Bush -- and today's evangelical Christians -- all wrong. Alan Jacobs (more from him here and here) suggests that the idea that President Bush's evangelical Christianity has an impact on his politics is really a misunderstanding of Bush, fundamentalists, and evangelicals.

A challenger to Bush

gregb1007 — Fri, 02 Jan 2004 21:51:30 -0800

A challenger to Bush for the Republican nomination?

Astroturfing gone bad.

skallas — Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:52:59 -0800

Astroturfing gone bad. Why aren't newspaper editors fighting this? They've seen it before. Its one thing to offer a press release and another to ask visitors of the Bush-Cheney website to mail their newspapers the same form letter.

Strange bedfellows fighting tyranny?

troutfishing — Wed, 27 Nov 2002 10:53:54 -0800

Strange Bedfellows fight tyranny? - Bob Barr, Dick Armey to join ACLU Quoth James Madison: (Federalist Papers #47) - "The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." and Benjamin Franklin:"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." William Safire Slammed the Bush Adminstration (Nov 15) over John Poindexter's Total Information Awareness program. NOW: Bob Barr, a gun-rights anti-gay firebrand conservative to join the ACLU? Dick Armey's joining as a consultant? Say that again? And Nat Hentoff reports that the Journal Gazette of Fort Wayne, Indiana ran a broadside called (sept. 8) "Attacks on Liberty" - "In the name of national security, President Bush, Attorney General John Ashcroft, and even Congress have pulled strand after strand out of the constitutional fabric that distinguishes the United States from other nations. . . . Actions taken over the past year are eerily reminiscent of tyranny portrayed in the most nightmarish works of fiction" MEANWHILE...an email of an editorial by right wing radio personality Chuck Baldwin, "Bush Government 'Out of Control' ("The Bush administration seems determined to turn our country into the most elaborate and sophisticated police state ever devised") first published in an online Christian Fundamentalist antiabortion newpaper is making the (right wing) rounds. It asks: "Does that mean one must leave the Republican Party in order to fight for liberty?" [antitroll protection dislaimer: most Democrats signed the Patriot Act, the principle cause of concern behind the statements and editorials linked to on this post]

sacre_bleu — Thu, 15 Aug 2002 20:25:53 -0800

Does invading Iraq require more than declaring Saddam Hussein "evil"? The New York Times reports public opposition from people not easily labeled Brie-sucking scared-of-war libyerals -- people like Henry "Bombs Away" Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft. Meanwhile, hawks argue that not attacking after all Bush's rhetoric would "produce such a collapse of confidence in the president that it would set back the war on terrorism." [registration required]

owillis — Tue, 09 Jan 2001 22:51:20 -0800

Clinton: "They thought the election was over, the Republicans did. By the time it was over, our candidate had won the popular vote, and the only way they could win the election was to stop the voting in Florida". Give 'em hell Bill!

owillis — Thu, 04 Jan 2001 16:22:25 -0800

The Age of Embarrassment "Bush’s cabinet choices are an assortment of right-wing ideologues, fat cats, has-beens, wannabees, and plain ol’ opportunists. There’s not a visionary in the bunch." Truth? Or liberal hysteria?

Medley — Mon, 16 Oct 2000 08:22:43 -0800

The Republicans make character assassination an art form. Several people have linked to this already on their sites and I haven't had a chance to update my own yet, but Phil Agre's latest piece about Republican dirty tricks is a must-read. "The past ten days will go down as a turning point in American history. This is what it's like when the far right is taking over your country: the people support Al Gore's policies, but the polls are shifting toward George W. Bush because the media is filled with false attacks on Al Gore's character."