[FairOpinion]

"The White House is used to being attacked by Democrats, but it came as something of a shock when fellow Republicans broke ranks over growth in government spending, hurting Bush at a time when his job approval numbers were already falling. "

Kerry, Edwards and Terry McAuliffe are very grateful! The Dems couldn't win in November without help from conservatives -- help, which is apparently is on its way. Conservatives seem more intent on defeating Bush, than the leftist Democrats.

[John Jorsett]

I've been noticing a spate of "gloves are coming off" and "Bush looks to shore up his base"-type stories of late. Did somebody in the White House just start reading their email and realize they've got a problem or what? It hasn't been much of a secret that there's a lot of unhappiness out here.

[Tax Government]

I'd like a constitutionality audit of the entire federal government... a position paper, authored by the RNC, summarizing each of the major principles of the constitution, and how the government is [is not] enforcing them.

Of course, requirements like "gold-backed currency" are sure to be met with an interesting, creative, but baldly lying response.

And democRats -- you might beat the RNC to the punch, with a lying, cr*p-filled position paper of your own. (Hoping you sense the opportunity, here, for a show of excellence from your side of the aisle.)

[vbmoneyspender]

Funny, I read the article and drew the exact opposite conclusion from that drawn by you -- namely that when you make valid criticisms with regard to the conduct of political leaders that you support, smart political leaders listen to those criticisms and act on them. Seems that Bush has gotten the message loud and clear that spending has increased too much, and now he is attempting to address that valid concern.

[GeronL]

The highway bill also raises the gas tax and that will ruin Bush's campaign before it starts. They will have to pass it over a VETO but that will still bring some hurt on Bush, 'couldn't control his own people' ya know...

and if he has a brainfart and signs it... remember that everytime he mentions how tax cuts are helping the economy the media will be sure to mention "Bush said tax cuts help the economy and he raised the gas tax".

I don't think he will sign it, but he had better start smacking some guys in Congress around on this issue!

rinohunter.blogspot.com

[BookmanTheJanitor]

I still think SF mayor Newsom is doing more to turn out Republicans than anyone.

[Lunatic Fringe]

You so-called "conservatives" better be ready to set aside your threats of staying home on election day... this is not the time to stand by on just one or two principles, like "budget deficits" or "education spending."

We are at war, and the only thing standing between us and victory is John F'ing Kerry. You need to think of the greater good... politics is the art of mixing principles with compromise. We won't get 100% of everything we want. Remember your government lessons on Majority Rule vs. Minority Rights- it's a lesson George W. Bush seems to remember well.

We need to be energized on election day, and give our President 4 more years.

[jungleboy]

Conservative Groups are W's Base?
I thought the big gov/no first amendment/Illegal Aliens were his base.

[churchillbuff]

Kerry, Edwards and Terry McAuliffe are very grateful!

Not just them, but ALL Democrats should be grateful that Bush has been spending like a Democrat!

[Kudsman]

William Niskanen, the chairman of the libertarian Cato Institute who advised former President Ronald Reagan, said he has personally not seen much of an outreach effort. "We'll have to see" what the White House does, he said.

Reaching does not mean lifting your hand at the wrist. Extend your arm Mr. President and firmly uphold the 2nd at no $ cost when the sun sets. That would speak volumes IMO.

And if I may be so bold as to suggestputting the onous of approval for Homo marriages on the Homos. Let them pass a Constitutional Amendment redefining the word marriage. It presently means only one thing. Make them convince the country that homosexuality is not an abomination. We don't need to prove that marriage is heterosexual. It is what it is.

[Happy2BMe]

"Conservative leaders who have taken part in private White House meetings in recent weeks said on Friday officials have promised to all but freeze non-defense spending, and assured them Bush will follow through on his threat to veto major highway legislation if Congress refuses to scale it back."

I would like to see the BILLIONS we waste each year on supporting illegal migrants via tax dollars go towards upgrading our rural and interstate roads instead.

We all know it will never happen.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

"Bush has been very attentive to the critique from the right,"

No he hasn't. He's ignored us until recently when it occured to him he just might need our vote. Vote this, Mr. President. You've lost me.

[Dan from Michigan]

"it came as something of a shock when fellow Republicans broke ranks over growth in government spending, hurting Bush at a time when his job approval numbers were already falling.

Maybe that's WHY his approval numbers are falling.

[foreverfree]

bump

[Tamzee]

Guess Which Candidate Our Enemies Want to Lose in 2004?

Newhouse News Service ^ | Feb. 11, 2004 | JAMES LILEKS


Let's just be blunt: The North Koreans would love to see John Kerry win the election. The mullahs of Iran would love it. The Syrian Ba'athists would sigh with relief. Every enemy of America would take great satisfaction if the electorate rejects the Bush doctrine and scuttles back to hide under the U.N. Security Council's table. It's a hard question, but the right one: Which candidate does our enemy want to lose? George W. Bush.

And some conservatives will be happy to help, it seems.

Woe and gloom have befallen some on the right. Bush has failed to act according to The Reagan Ideal.

The actual Reagan may have issued an amnesty for illegals, but the Ideal Reagan would have done no such thing. So unless Bush packs freight cars full of gardeners and dishwashers and dumps them off at the Mexican border, some voters will just sit this one out.

The Ideal Reagan would have eliminated the National Endowment for the Arts; the actual Reagan proposed a $1 million increase in his final budget. But Bush increased NEA funding -- perhaps an attempt to placate people who wouldn't vote for him if he showed up in performance with Karen Finley and a can of Hershey's syrup. So angry conservatives might just sit this one out.

And if a Democrat takes office, and the Michael Moores and Rob Reiners and Martin Sheens crowd the airwaves on Nov. 3 to shout their howls of vindication? If the inevitable renaissance of Iraq happens on Kerry's watch, and the economy truly picks up steam in the first few years before the business cycle and Kerry's tax hikes kick in? If emboldened Islamist terrorists smell blood and strike again? Fine. Maybe the next Republican president will do everything they want.

Oh, sure, Bush is fine on the foreign affairs stuff, and yes, there's a partial-birth abortion law, and the tax cuts were nice, and come to think of it, Sept. 11 wasn't followed by blow after blow after blow, for some reason. The nation endures, at least at press time. But that's hardly enough. Where's that bill requiring 60-foot Ten Commandments monuments in every capitol rotunda? Let Kerry win. Teach the GOP a lesson, it will.

continued... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1080687/posts

[RightOnline]

"Conservatives seem more intent on defeating Bush, than the leftist Democrats."

Sorry........but with all due respect, that's utter bulls**t.

[WFTR]

President Bush would also be wise not to say anything else in support of extending the assault weapons ban. If that law is not allowed to sunset, conservatives will be very upset in November. President Bush doesn't need the votes of those people who may or may not vote for him if the ban passes, but he cannot afford to lose the votes of those who will be angry with him if the ban passes.

If he tries to be all things to all people to win 55% of the vote, he may end up losing the election. If he maintains his base and adds the votes of those who fairly understand that he is doing a good job in attacking the terrorists, he will almost certainly win with 51% or 52% of the vote and have a real mandate for true conservative change.

Well, four and a half
Bill

[Charlotte Corday]

The White House apparently thinks that the American people are so ignorant of/opposed to the war on terror, that they won't endorse it at the ballot box unless it comes coated with a four-foot thick layer of government pork.

If the White House is wrong, they need to hear it.

If the White House is right, the country won't last another ten years irrespective of who wins in November.

[nutmeg]

ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

[tgslTakoma]

You got it bass-ackwards there, FO. The message I get from the story is that Bush and his team are finally listening to the conservatives what brung him to the White House.

They do seem a bit surprised by the outcry from conservatives. I guess they figured we'd just grab our ankles, and thank them for the opportunity to be screwed by our side.

[Mo1]

Let me get this straight .. these congress folks (from both parties) jam pack pork spending into important bills the President needs to help fight terrorism and other issues and then they turn around and complain about high spending???

Here's a suggestion to congress .. stop hiding your personal pork spending into important bills