Apr 16 2007

Does Far Right Deserve Bush’s Fundraising Support?

Published by at 8:01 am under 2008 Elections,All General Discussions

Does Tancredo deserve to receive the fundraising support of President Bush – who can still find buckets of money for candidates? Does any of those candidates who attacked and quit the President in a pique of frustration and self absorption deserve is assistance? In my opinion – no. Bush’s support among Dems is not any different from day one of his presidency (ignoring the 9-11 boost he deserved). But what has changed is the Rep/Con turncoats who bolted and therefore weakened him. They wanted to teach a lesson and now they are learning one – they are not in power. Personally I would like to never see Bush at a Tancredo event (McCain is a different issue totally since he has been a stalward defender of Iraq). I think the lessons may still need to be taught for a few hardened conservatives who won’t support Bush but want any money they can get out of him. Who wants to align with that kind of person in a governing coalition where they would dump you in a heartbeat and throw you to the wolves?

12 responses so far

12 Responses to “Does Far Right Deserve Bush’s Fundraising Support?”

  1. lurker9876 says:

    The answer is a resounding NO! And they do not deserve it. Amazing how Bush can generate campaign contributions even to this very day! Let’s hope to see the Republicans raise even far more money than the democrats.

    Tancredo and Hagel do not have my votes.

  2. BarbaraS says:

    Actually Bush is not unpopular with republicans. And the ones he is unpopular with have no options. He is the president and will be for almost two years. And since the only other candidate to vote for in 2008 is a dim (and in the case of Hillary a dangerous dim) what are they going to do, stay home and let the dims have congress and the presidency. There is not a lot of choice there.

    I do hope the last election has been a wake-up call to the people who take their toys and go home when they can’t get their way entirely. The only two things I really, really care about is the GWOT and the economy and Bush is doing just fine in both. Or at least he hasn’t flip flopped on the need to take out Saddam like the dims and is determined on victory instead of defeat.

    As far as immigration is concerned there should be some incentive to make the illegals want to go home. Maybe build more factories in Mexico. Goodness knows the wages are cheap down there.

  3. For Enforcement says:


    “As far as immigration is concerned there should be some incentive to make the illegals want to go home.”

    I thought the working theory was that the illegals are necessary here to fill all those jobs Americans won’t do.

  4. ivehadit says:

    Enforcement, nothing is black and white. There are gray areas in most things in life, as in immigration.

    What happened in New Orleans? Hispanics are doing the rebuilding! Not the lazy, drug -riddled ones who lived in the projects. Why? They are mobile! They travel to where the work is. And they are excellent workers.

    There are many wonderful blacks that live in New Orleans. I know many and love them as my family. But there are the ones who the dems have absolutely destroyed their lives with handouts and welfare. No incentives to make something of themselves. The hispanics are saving New Orleans, imho, by just getting down to work. And the same was true for Miami years ago.

  5. Aitch748 says:

    I must have spent my last few years on the wrong websites because they tend to be the blogs and forums that seem to be quickest to throw people under the bus. Not just Bush, though I’ve seen enough “El Presidente Jorge” nonsense to last me for a good while, but also just about anybody who gets accused of anything. Supposedly Gonzales needs to leave because he lied to Congress about why the eight federal prosecutors were fired, or because he allowed Border Patrol agents to be railroaded, or — who knows? (Actually, why IS Gonzales no good? I haven’t quite figured that out, but I keep reading that he’s been a DISASTER.)

    It makes me wonder if Republicans should have just circled the wagons around Mark Foley — it’s obvious that jettisoning him as fast as they possibly could didn’t do them any good; they STILL got hammered for, basically, circling the wagons to protect Mark Foley. I mean, why bother to do the right thing if you’re going to get punished for doing the wrong thing whether you did it or not?

  6. For Enforcement says:


    It wasn’t my working theory I was referring to. I just thought it ironic that we have someone wanting to create jobs in Mexico to get the mexicans back there when ‘practically everyone’ is saying they are needed here in the US.

    I agree on New Orleans. If it weren’t for the Mexican labor doing the work there, it would be at quite a standstill.

  7. Terrye says:


    Well you see Gonzales is supposed to frog march Leahy and Pelosi out of the Capitol building for leaking and for violating the Logan Act or whatever. And if he does not, who needs him.

    These people are idiots, just like their compadres on the left.

  8. Terrye says:


    If it is true that there are 12 million illegals here then I would assume they are all kinds of people. And it is important that we do something about the problem rather than just make snarky comments.

  9. For Enforcement says:

    Terrye, okay, what do you have in mind? What was the ‘snarky’ comment and what does ‘snarky’ mean anyhow?

    Are you saying you don’t see the irony of that proposal. Are you for creating jobs in Mexico to get the illegals back there? Aren’t you one of the people that say Mexicans are needed here for jobs Americans won’t do?

    If it is true? If? 12 million is a very low estimate, I’m sure.

    Are you for unconditional amnesty? Why not do something constructive rather than criticize someone for pointing out hypocrisy.

  10. For Enforcement says:

    Terrye, i looked it up and dictionary.com says snarky means:

    Rudely sarcastic or disrespectful; snide.

    If that’s what you were saying, tell me which part was Rudely sarcastic or disrectful? or snide?

    By the way, your comment was rather snarky.

  11. ivehadit says:

    Hi Enforcement,
    I realize what you were saying. No disrespect intended. I just get tired of all the character assasinations and “gotcha politics” that go on in this incredibly complex time…a time where bold ideas are being tried…which means failing at some is inevitable.

    One thing I see is how much of an entrenched power base their is in Washington…one that is operating on our dime and will undermine anyone, elected or not, that gets in their way. I am glad George W. Bush has been there…he suffers no fools, trust me. And he knows who is doing what to whom…but cannot necessarily bust up everything that is going on…has to pick his battles.

  12. For Enforcement says:

    Agree, I also feel it’s a good thing we had Pres Bush to handle these last few years. Don’t know anyone that would have done a better job.