From FT.com:
President George W. Bush had shown disdain and indifference for the US constitution by adopting an “astonishingly broad” view of presidential powers, a leading libertarian think-tank said on Monday.
This is not from some liberal not over at MoveOn.org, instead it comes from the highly respected Cato Institute. The report (Power Surge: The Constitutional Record of George W. Bush) published yesterday concludes:
President Bush’s constitutional vision is, in short, sharply at odds with the text, history, and structure of our Constitution, which authorizes a government of limited powers.
I could not agree more. Where is the leadership this Nation deserves? Why has the government expanded so much in the past 6 years?
Bush theatens to veto any attempt to stop him! (thanks Drudge.)
“After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward,” Bush told reporters who had traveled with him on Air Force One to Washington. “I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company.
As any reader of my blog knows, I have been a huge supporter of President Bush. That said, this deal to give control of 6 US Ports to a company from Dubai is completely unacceptable. Nothing matters more than our national security. I do not want any foreigners defending America on American soil. How can we defend our borders and wage a war on terror while our “friends” give the terrorists an easy route into the US?
The great Ann Coulter perfectly summarizes my take on the Bush Administration:
For five years, Bush has initiated massive spending programs, obstinately refused to protect the borders and signed restrictions on political speech into law. His veto pen remains unopened and unused in its original shrink-wrapped case. Bush treats conservatives like the Democrats treat the blacks (which is to say, pretty badly).
Conservatives were unhappy, but we were confident Bush would never let us down on the two issues that mattered more than anything else: the war on terrorism and the Supreme Court. Although Bush has been bold and strong against the terrorists, with the Miers nomination it was beyond question that he had betrayed conservative hopes for the Supreme Court.
Now, can Bush nominate someone with an excellent track record who can stand strong with Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas and the newly appointed Chief Justice Roberts?
George W. on Kerry’s “Conservative Values”:
My opponent recently announced that he is the candidate of “conservative values,” which must have come as a surprise to a lot of his supporters. Now, there are some problems with this claim. If you say the heart and soul of America is found in Hollywood, I’m afraid you are not the candidate of conservative values. If you voted against the bipartisan Defense of Marriage Act, which President Clinton signed, you are not the candidate of conservative values. If you gave a speech, as my opponent did, calling the Reagan presidency eight years of “moral darkness,” then you may be a lot of things, but the candidate of conservative values is not one of them.
Full text of President Bush’s speech | iTunes 2004 Republican Convention, Day Four.
Governor Pataki offers words of encouragement as we look forward to the President’s Agenda:
Almost four years ago George W. Bush raised his right hand and took the oath of office. And from the first he showed us something we hadnít seen in a while. When he said he was going to do something, he meant it.
Full text of Gov. Pataki’s speech | iTunes 2004 Republican Convention, Day Four.
Recent Comments