Archive for September, 2003
Next Entries »Miguel Estrada: The Victim of a Political Hate Crime
Thursday, September 4th, 2003Twenty-eight months and seven partisan filibusters later, Miguel Estrada has thrown in the towel, withdrawing his name from consideration for a seat on the federal bench.
This is a sad end to the shameful war the liberals in the Senate have waged against their worst enemy: a conservative minority.
President Bush issued the following statement:
It is with regret that, at the request of Miguel Estrada, I have today withdrawn his nomination to the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. I understand and respect his decision, and wish Mr. Estrada and his family the best.
Mr. Estrada received disgraceful treatment at the hands of 45 United States Senators during the more than two years his nomination was pending. Despite his superb qualifications and the wide bipartisan support for his nomination, these Democrat Senators repeatedly blocked an up-or-down vote that would have led to Mr. Estrada’s confirmation. The treatment of this fine man is an unfortunate chapter in the Senate’s history.
I commend Bush for saying it straight up. The Democrat senators who chose to block a simple up-or-down vote are spineless demagogues
And what did the Democrats do in reaction to this? They blamed the White House.
Senator Charles Schumer, Democrat of New York said, “Mr. Estrada is an unfortunate victim of a White House process of not cooperating with the Senate and stonewalling the appointment of judges.”
Pardon me? Who was filibustering for over two years? Who didn’t give an overly qualified nominee a chance for an up-and-down vote?
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said, “The Democrat’s character assassination of Miguel Estrada was a political hate crime… We have witnessed the Democrats at their ugliest.”
So now Texas Supreme Court judge Priscilla Owen will be on the front lines of the Democrats bastardization of democracy. Democrats have said that she is an “anti-abortion and pro-business judicial activist whose opinions and rulings are overly influenced by her personal beliefs.”
Now, what that really means is that she’s a conservative woman, and the Democrats can’t stand a conservative woman, who is pro-life nonetheless, being confirmed… So what do they do? With the Republicans holding only a slim majority in the Senate, and at least 60 votes to end a filibuster, the Democrats has successfully found a way to stall the judicial nomination process, at the expense of our legal system’s efficiency.
Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor, is subject to the same disgraceful tactics of the Democrats mainly for being pro-life.
California judge Carolyn Kuhl, still awaits confirmation after it was postponed because “Democratic opponents suggested her record was too far to the right on privacy, civil rights and abortion.”
Judge Charles Pickering, has also seen his confirmation blocked for “being too conservative.”
The common crime: conservatism.
The common enemy: Democrats.
The common victims: America and democracy.
Estrada’s bowing out should signal to Republicans that they need to scale up their efforts to counter the despicable behavior of Senate Democrats. This is not the time for Bush to nominate less conservative judges. It’s time for Bush to put his cowboy hat on and demand the Democrats vote to confirm his nominees and fill the judicial vacancies.
Bush Takes On The Economy - Shows His Leadership
Wednesday, September 3rd, 2003The declining economy Clinton left behind is currently being restored by George W. Bush. This past Monday, Labor Day, President Bush spoke about the accomplishments of his administration in handling the economy, and the work that still needs to be done. Touting our high productivity, Bush put into perspective the accomplishments we’ve made in America – which have ultimately led to our enjoying such a high standard of living. “Higher productivity means that workers earn more,” Bush said, “and it means it takes less time for workers to earn the money to buy the things they need.”
To help put into perspective our accomplishments over the years, we must also recognize some of the setbacks, and understand exactly what they were and how we get out of them. “In early 2000, the stock market started to decline,” noted Bush, “It was a forerunner of the recession that came. The first quarter of 2001, we were in recession. But we acted to come out of that recession. We acted with tax relief.”
And what happened? Sales went up in July – by 1.4 percent. This increase was the largest we’ve seen in four months. This is the sign of a recovering economy.
When George W. Bush talks, you know he believes in what he’s talking about:
…Here’s what I believe and here is what I know. When you’ve got more money in your pocket, it means you’re going to spend or save and invest. And when you spend and save or invest, somebody is going to produce a product for you to be able to spend your money on. When somebody produces a product, it’s more likely somebody is going to be able to find a job. Tax relief was needed to stem the recession.
He knows that, I know that. Economists have said tax cuts would improve economic growth. Yet there is a vocal minority out there who keep trying to the sell the idea that Bush’s tax cuts caused the recession. They can believe what they like, if it helps them sleep at night. Bush correctly noted, “it was a shallow recession because of the tax relief.”
I say amen!
Many people don’t understand the gravity of 9/11 and how it affected our economy. Bush explained that that fateful day two years cost the American economy $80 billion, which is “the equivalent of wiping out about one-fifth of Ohio’s economy.”
Now, thanks to Bush’s economic policies, we’re seeing economic recovery. Bush is right, when more of our money is in our pockets, it’s better than the government having it. “It’s your choice,” he said, “you see, after all, in Washington we don’t spend the government’s money; we spend your money.” And you know what? I trust myself with my money more than I trust the government.
What amazes me is how many people speak against tax cuts when they don’t understand what they are talking about. Bush’s latest tax cut took 3 million people off the rolls. That means that three million people, who are certainly in the lowest tax bracket, are no longer paying taxes. That’s not tax cuts for the wealthy, that’s tax relief for lower income taxpayers. Such much for the liberal myth of tax cuts for the rich.
Bush laid out a plan he proposed to Congress in his speech:
I proposed to Congress a new idea to help people get back to work, particularly those that had the hardest time finding work. We call them reemployment accounts. I proposed spending $3.6 billion to help a million Americans find work. We’d … put some money aside for somebody to use for day care or retraining, to be able to move. If they’re able to find a job in a prescribed period of time, they’d be able to keep the difference between what we gave them to begin with and what was unspent. In other words, a reemployment bonus. It’s a novel approach to help a million Americans who are having a tough time finding work to find work. Reemployment accounts make sense. Congress needs to act.
Sounds like a good plan. It sounds more like what the government should be doing – helping people help themselves.
Bush’s vision for America has helped us getting out of a failing economy, and will lead us back into prosperity. The Democrats running for President can continue to waste their time condemning Bush’s policies, domestic and foreign, however, pretending like Bush’s policies are actually reasons not to vote for him are just going ensure President Bush’s reelection.
From the War on Terror, to bringing our economy back on its feet, George W. Bush proven his leadership, and his aptitude. Thank you George W. Bush, and God bless America.
The Dean Machine… It’s a Bit Rusty
Tuesday, September 2nd, 2003While some people may hate to see this, a survey of 1,499 likely voters, done August 29-September 1, showed overwhelming positive results for Bush against likely Democratic rivals.
If Hillary Clinton chose to run and was the Democratic nominee (God forbid), Bush beats her 48% to 41%
Interestingly enough, roughly 50% of the unsure voters would rally behind Bush in the event of Hillary’s candidacy. So, while she attracts more votes than other Democrats, her candidacy would bring more independent/undecided voters to vote for the Bush tucket
Senator John Kerry, loses to Bush 45% to 36%
Howard Dean, the Democrat almost every liberal on the internet has a wet dream for, trails the other Democrats with a mere 34% to Bush’s 45% This is gold. Howard Dean, who has done well fundraising on a weak anti-Bush agenda, is clearly the least likely to defeat Bush.
So much for the Dean Machine…
Next Entries »