The problem with your thinking is that there is now a divergence in being a supporter of the President and being a "conservative". Currently, you can't be both. Do you support President Bush or are you a conservative? The two are mutally exclusive. Sorry to break the news to you on this one.
If you support Bush, you can't call yourself a conservative. If you call yourself a conservative, how can you support Bush? Get it?
I wish FR had a logic section.
Then YOU must have that long sought and so far not found "true" conservative definition. Would you please post it so all of these imposters can be unmasked?
I'm afraid though that the party in firmly in the hands of the Country Club Republicans who care nothing about the grass roots or the culture of this nation. They've basically sold out the conservative base to curry up to the infanticidal, gun banning, gay-loving "moderates" that will always end up voting Democratic in the end.
You'll make LOTS of friends here.
That's your opinion ; which counts for absoluely nothing, as far as the definition of Conservative goes.
If you support Bush, you can't call yourself a conservative. If you call yourself a conservative, how can you support Bush? Get it?
With all due respect, this is so lame.
It sounds as if you believe your support to be some pure and unsullied thing that would be tarnished by stooping to support someone (like W) who is not equally as pure as your untarnished conservative self. That's fine for a university professor. But in the real world, in politics in a country where more than half the people just voted for a totalitarian, enviro-nazi last year, you're going to have to stoop a little. Unless you just like hearing yourself whine.
Listen closely. Today, W is the best we are going to get. I would prefer Alan Keyes, Phil Gramm, Dick Armey or a host of others. I would prefer them a lot. I would prefer Barry Goldwater (before he went libertarian) or the Gipper. But none of them will be elected president. If elected, they could not govern effectively because there is no consensus for a big lurch to the right.
The best we will get is incremental improvements in some areas and maybe even some backsliding in others. Unless you have come up with a way to turn soccer moms or minorities into sensible voters, this is it.
Of course, W could govern from the right and antagonize all the soccer moms, throw the coming senate and house elections and lose in 2004. Bummer. But at least you wouldn't have sullied yourself by supporting someone who is not a pure conservative.
W is a good tactician and a moderate conservative. He is picking his fights and not even choosing fights where he is going to get bloodied. It's all about the Senate next November. In an age where over half of the public are idiots and think that algore shoud be president, we need a tactician. He will spend eight years tacking us gently to the right where he can. At the end of that, we have another chance to ask the voters not to be so stupid. Hopefully it will work in 2008.
In the meantime, get involved in the party so that in 2008, you have some influence. We need influential conservative true believers in the party.