The left's lame attempt to discredit Bush in the final days before the election show's their desperation AND the fact that Bush is farther ahead than the polls indicate.
The radio shows here are all pretty much in agreement that this 'revelation' won't harm Bush much if at all. A DUI conviction 24 years ago - one which he could have gotten out of or covered but instead admitted guilt and took his punishment as it came. Not only is this not hurting Bush, many talk show hosts I listen to feel this helps him - shows he didnt' used his, or his father's position to get out of the conviction. He pleaded guilty on the spot.
Also, for those who don't know, Bush no longer drinks at all.
I am just wondering the thoughts and general feel of this from other parts of the country and other parts of the world as well.
I would assume that DUI has something to do with drinking and driving. Alchol related offence of some kind even if a summary conviction type offence. I think the way he conducted himself in any event speaks volums about his honesty. It all goes to character does'nt it. Clinton-Gore are known in quite another light. Gore will try to invent himself again this weekend in hopes that he can scam the people once again. Did everyone see through his war hero speech? Put your thinking caps on voters -dump Clinton-Gore because voting Gore is the same as voting Clinton,- they wear the same mask, they are clones/commies.
Liberals seem to have different values for themselves than for conservatives.
Bush's drinking under the influence is a case in point:
Clinton smokes pot, (an illegal act in the absence of medical excuse), and proclaims, "I uh didn't inhale." He then lies to the American people and to the courts about his harassment scandals. Liberal media response - why is everyone beating up on poor Clinton?
Hilary Clinton receives illegal financing for her New York senate electoral bid and is forced, when it becomes public, to return those funds. Liberal media response - poor Hilary, the abuse women in politics must endure!
Al Gore attends an illegal fundraiser at a Budhist temple and then explains, "I uh duh didn't know it was a Budhist temple." Liberal media response - why are we making such a big deal out of something so trivial?
The Democratic Party is shown to have been receiving millions of dollars in campaign contributions from Communist China! Liberal media response - what have conservatives got against ethnic minorities?
BUT, when it is discovered that 25 years ago, Bush was found driving under the influence, which he readily acknowledges and accepts blame for. An event after which, he would never drink again and for which he apologizes for, the Liberal media responds - crucify him! crucify him! What an insensensitive bastard! Does he have no respect for the law?
It never ceases to amaze me how little focus has been on the Democratic Party's record with regards to communist Chinese infiltration of not only the party itself, but of national security information as well. To me, this was the big issue of the campaign and it was completely ignored.
Western nations continue to move towards communist philosophy as part of a larger plan to establish global governance. Our media provides the spin, and absent parenting does the rest.
Bush was DUI 25 years ago? It might be an issue if it happened yesterday but 25 years? Don't forget, you don't have to be drunk to blow over. The limit is set low because alcohol effects different people differently. You can be stone sober and legally under the influence.
Even if Bush spent most of his days sloshed he'd still be a better choice than Gore. It would be better to have a President under the influence of alcohol than under the infuence of communist China!
Don't forget the Leftwing Royalty - the Kennedy's. How many people have they wiped out? Ted Kennedy is the record holder I think. Lot's of DUI's in that family to.
Bush only had ONE and it was 25 years ago. The difference is he didn't have ties to organized crime like the worthless scum family, heroes to the left and other twisted people - the Kennedy's...
And, despite the body count, the left still view that family, JFK, Ted, and all the rest as some kind of heroic rightous royalty of America.
That's what you can expect from people who believe killing repeat violent offenders is wrong, but killing "unwanted" babies is a wonderful thing.
I find if incredible that with Bush the media look back 24 years and try to play up a drinking/driving charge which to his credit he owned up to yet they can't go back 5 mins. to pick up on Gore's past activities. Bush is always shown in a bad light in the press, yet Gore is always pictured with a smile of confidence, a grin of knowing (the managed left wing media is his alone) Why does character and truth not matter anymore?
I intended to add that with two main parties and a small third party like the Green party (even though led by a well known man like Nader)the choice is clear. How about in Canada with 5 main parties, not so clear although the media seems very much in the Liberal camp. Sorry, I intended to add this to the above posting but forgot.
That is strange isn't it. You notice to that the liberals have to go back 24 years in the first place just to find anything Bush. That's pretty desperate and pathetic.
we should expect aspersions against Bush to increase
November 6 2000, 7:54 PM
Remember the media hype about racist arson being directed against black churches? Clinton-Gore exploited this calling it hate crime, then used it as a reason to beef up hate crime enforcement nation wide. The media claimed it was the work of white Christians. This helped Clinton-Gore create a task force to direct all investigations for their invented crisis. Conservative politicians where behind it all said Jesse Jackson. The very agencies responsible for the death trap fire at Mount Carmel in Waco was given the power to investigate (FBI and BATF) - expect more dirty tricks from the liberals with one day to go. When satanism rather than some racist bent was behind the church fires, the media walked away. It was satanism at Combine High School also, by the media and Clinton-Gore used it as a reason to ban guns.
I just got an email from a liberal communist group. They falsly posed as Bush and the email was GeorgeWBush@badidea.com
They they spewed a bunch of lies and garbage. This is yet another lame attempt by the lying left to discredit Bush. They can't find anything real so they make up garbage.
The reason the media walked away from claims of Satanism is because if the liberals have any religion it's Satanism. They hate God, Christ, The Holy Spirit, Jews, and Christians....
"Liberalism is driven by a mysterious antagonism to the moral
traditions of the Many. In any society the Few rule the Many, but in
most societies the ruling elite shares the general moral outlook of
the majority of the population and there is no basic conflict between
the rulers and the ruled. In today's America, so alien to our
ancestors, it is different. The Few not only hate the traditions of
the Many; they have conducted a relentless propaganda campaign against
those traditions, variously called 'education,' 'eradicating
prejudice,' and 'consciousness-raising.' They coin new-fangled words
like 'homophobia' to stigmatize deep-seated popular attitudes; they
publicize and memorialize minor local incidents, like vicious murders
of homosexuals, making them symbols of the moral attitudes they want
to condemn. In pursuit of this agenda, the Many must be made to feel
guilty about their natural feelings. And the government must be
empowered to engineer a mass psychological transformation, until those
feelings cease to exist. The process must begin with children in the
public schools, where state propaganda will teach them that
homosexuality is normal. The desire of the Few to control and change
even the inner lives of the Many is of course a totalitarian ambition.
Liberals denounce 'sexual McCarthyism' as they practice what might be
called sexual Stalinism. As Stalin aspired to create the 'New Soviet
Man,' liberals want to produce new, sexually 'liberated' children,
with homosexual propaganda as one of their tools." --Joseph Sobran
In a democracy the majority rules. However if the government can control what people think through the media, they could control how they vote. You get a dictatorship with mock elections like in Canada. In Canada the media is so biased that no right wing party will ever form a government.
I think the Clinton-Gore crowd have learned from Canada on this one. Americans decided to let the NRA fight the gun issue as they became politically apathetic when it comes to their right to own firearms so Clinton-Gore circumvented the house and the senate passing executive orders, then turned BATF loose on gun dealers. Al Gore has no beliefs of his own and will do and say whatever is convenient for the party agenda. There is a very real danger that Gore could win enough electoral votes to slime in. If he does, take pictures of your firearms so you can remember what they looked like. In Canada, there is only one party which could be called right wing - Alliance party. They do not have a chance with Liberal, PC s, NDP party attacks on them a liberal owned Ontario and a managed left-wing media down their throat at every turn.
You hit the nail on the head. I even know avid deer hunters and handgun owners who voted for Gore!!! I asked them if I could have their guns since they obviously don't want them. They reply with comments like "what do you mean?" or "Come on, you don't believe that right wing hype Gore can't take away guns" - or even more incredible = "I didn't vote for Gore because of guns, I voted for him because I want good health care" (now there's an idiot).
I find it incredible that anyone would have any confidence in Bush or Gore. Bush is just like his father, a socialist and for that matter, so is Gore! I vote no confidence in any of them. They are all bought and paid for by the highest bidder.
Actually, Bush isn't a socialist. A socialist is a communist who won't admit it. Bush is a Capitalist. Gore is a communist.
Your point is valid in as much as neither canidate is as far right or left as they could be for their respective parties. That's the problem today. You have to be middle of the road to get anywhere - that's why it's politics.
(POLI= Many, TICS= Blood sucking insects)
While I would rather see Pat Buchanan up there myself, perhaps with Allan Keyes as a VP, it's not going to happen, at least not this time. You don't have to vote for Bush or Gore.
If you want to vote Republican and Conservative - vote for National Party Pat Buchanan. If you want to vote Democratic - vote for that Greenhouse guy, Darth Vader. And there's Brown, the Liberatrian. So you are not limited to Bush and Gore if you don't like either.
With enough votes, maybe on the next election the third party canidates will get enough to be included in the debates.
In the U.S. I personally liked Allan Keyes better than Bush. Bush and Gore (two rich boys) are however the main choices. Bush is not the commie Gore is and to an extent no matter who the winner, the new president will have powerfull people in the world government cabal to deal with. Would you sooner have someone like Gore there so willing to give away the store for power. Think of where (or should I say who) Clinton-Gore campaign funds have come from in the past. When the media is so biased in coverage of the election run maybe the choice is opposite to their man Gore. I like that definition of politics by Mike. Don't take a cop out view and not vote at all (consider one of the also ran parties)that is how third parties that are more palatable eventually win.
