Bush-Bashing Conservatives Should Focus on the Big Picture

GOPUSA.com ^ | Januray.26,2004 | Bobby Eberle

[Reagan Man]

The 2004 campaign season is well at hand. Following the dramatic turn-around from earlier polling results, the strong showing by Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and John Edwards (D-NC) has brought renewed focus by the media on the possibilities of President Bush not only facing formidable opposition, but also losing his bid for reelection. A newly released Newsweek poll shows Kerry defeating President Bush if the election were held today. Of course, the poll is meaningless in the sense that President Bush has not yet begun to campaign, but it does add fuel to the fire that 2004 could be as close as the historic elections of 2000. With that in mind, it's time for conservatives across the country to focus on the big picture and realize that a Bush loss is far worse than a Bush victory.

The Newsweek poll garnering so much media attention shows Sen. Kerry defeating President Bush by 49%-46%. The result is understandable considering the endless attacks on President Bush by the Democrats challenging him for the White House. These attacks, levied during debates, stump speeches, and television commercials have largely gone unanswered by the president or the Republican Party. If the public is only getting one side of the story, then there should be no surprise when the president's numbers head south. The true test of public opinion will come once President Bush begins his campaign and America hears both sides of the story. Of course, the ultimate public opinion poll will be the 2004 presidential election itself.

In addition to the hits being taken by the president from the Democrats, President Bush has also sustained damage from those on his side of the political aisle: Republicans and conservatives who vote Republican. The anger expressed by conservatives toward President Bush is primarily focused on two issues: border security/immigration and federal spending.

President Bush's recent announcement of a "temporary worker" program has drawn harsh criticism from conservatives across the country. The volume of feedback I have received on this issue has been almost unanimously one-sided and in opposition to the president's plan -- a plan which conservatives feel is synonymous with "amnesty" for illegal immigrants. Under the Bush plan, illegal immigrants could apply for a 3-year temporary worker designation which would grant them legal status to remain in the U.S. provided they have employment or have a job waiting for them. In addition to the illegal immigrant being allowed to gain the benefits of residency in America, the worker's family would also be allowed to join the worker inside the U.S.

The other "stick in the eye" for conservatives is the massive increases in federal spending which have occurred over the past three years. Increases in the rate of growth of non-defense, discretionary spending in the current Bush administration are double that of the Clinton administration. Republicans have gone on a spending spree, and there appears to be no end in sight. Despite the fact that smaller, limited government is one of the tenets of conservative, Republican philosophy, congressional Republicans have shown over the last several years that they can spend with the best of them. To President Bush's credit, the budgets presented to the Congress by the administration have included modest increases in non-defense, discretionary spending by most observations. However, the budgets returned to the president for final approval have shown no restraint and are loaded with excess pork.

As a conservative, I share the philosophical concerns of friends and colleagues. Following the events of September 11, 2001, border security should be of the utmost concern, and promoting programs that not only potentially weaken security but also reward illegal behavior is just plain wrong. In addition, one of my core beliefs in which I identify myself as a conservative and as a Republican is my belief in smaller, limited government. If one of our core values is no longer being observed by our elected officials, then feelings of anger and betrayal are understandable and justified.

The key question going into the 2004 presidential election is "What is a conservative to do?"

The answer to this question is simple: conservatives must wake up and smell the coffee. The best choice for conservatives; the best candidate to advance our agenda; and the best person in which to put our hope and faith is President George W. Bush.

On the two previously mentioned issues of immigration policy and federal spending, conservatives only need to look at the alternatives to see that President Bush is the right person for the job. Regarding immigration policy, if Sen. Kerry were to become America's next president, there would be no need to debate the merits of granting legal status to a portion of illegal immigrants, because wide spread amnesty would be the policy of choice. Both Kerry and Edwards favor amnesty for illegal immigrants and would open the flood gates on America's already porous borders. According to campaign information, both Kerry and Edwards favor legalizing the status of illegal immigrants who have worked in the U.S. for a certain period of time.

The best hope for the immigration issue and border security is for conservatives to work diligently for President Bush's reelection and to demand sensible immigration reform from members of Congress. The real work on immigration will be done in Congress. Conservatives must push for meaningful reform, while working to ensure that the candidate who most closely shares our views wins in November. That person is President George W. Bush.

In regards to federal spending, one can only imagine the budgets that would be submitted by Kerry, Edwards, or Dean. A score card of liberal votes in Congress maintained by Americans for Democratic Action shows that Sen. Kerry actually has a more liberal voting record (93%-88%) than his Massachusetts counterpart: Sen. Ted Kennedy. Thus, a Kerry presidency means spending restraint by the Executive Branch goes right out the window. Conservatives have a right to be angry over spending, but the way to fight for our cause is to demand that our Republican legislators trim the pork. It is also up to us to push for presidential leadership in this area. We should support President Bush in his call for fiscal responsibility. We should also call on the president to unleash his veto pen if fiscal responsibility is not what he gets.

Much has been written in recent weeks in op-eds, letters to the editor, Internet discussion boards, and so on regarding conservative dissatisfaction with the current administration. The Bush administration should listen to their concerns, and the conservative community should work for positive solutions. Staying home on Election Day is not the answer. Voting for a third party candidate is not the answer. Writing in a protest vote is not the answer. Had just a small percentage of liberal voters stood with Al Gore in Florida rather than voting for Ralph Nader, the entire outcome of the 2000 presidential election could have been different. Conservatives cannot stay home in November. We must be on the ground working for President Bush and advancing our agenda in the process.

The conservative movement needs a voice, and it needs a leader. President Bush is that leader, and he has stood by conservatives on many of the issues we hold dear. The president is a stalwart on life issues and has been unwavering in his support of a ban on partial birth abortions. The president has been equally strong in putting forward judicial nominees who respect the Constitution and who will not legislate from the bench. The president is a leader in the war on terror, and I can think of no one better suited to occupy the oval office in this time of turmoil. The best way to fight for the conservative agenda is to fight for the reelection of President George W. Bush.

---

Bobby Eberle is President and CEO of GOPUSA (www.GOPUSA.com), a news, information, and commentary company based in Houston, TX. He holds a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Rice University.

[rebel25]

Let us not give the enemy any ammunition to fire at President Bush. He is the only line of defense against a leftist President this term. Not let us circle the wagons and keep a positive message for four more years, then in 2008, let us do what the rats are doing, find the best candidate that stands for our values. I support W.

[ClancyJ]

Well, while you are unhappy - try not to turn other people to the democrat party please.

Just always remember - how conservative can you get with a democrat as President.

That is reality.

Who said a conservative president had to be perfect and please every last one of the conservatives before he could expect any support from his own party?

Nothing like putting him out on the firing line and then abandoning him to the firing squad.

[kaktuskid]

The only part that really sucks about having a DemonRat president is the judicial nominations. :(


Which is a MAJOR reason to support Bush (How would you like the 9th circus clowns ruling become the norm??)

[MeekOneGOP]

Good article, thanks !:

Much has been written in recent weeks in op-eds, letters to the editor, Internet discussion boards, and so on regarding conservative dissatisfaction with the current administration. The Bush administration should listen to their concerns, and the conservative community should work for positive solutions. Staying home on Election Day is not the answer. Voting for a third party candidate is not the answer. Writing in a protest vote is not the answer. Had just a small percentage of liberal voters stood with Al Gore in Florida rather than voting for Ralph Nader, the entire outcome of the 2000 presidential election could have been different. Conservatives cannot stay home in November. We must be on the ground working for President Bush and advancing our agenda in the process.

The conservative movement needs a voice, and it needs a leader. President Bush is that leader, and he has stood by conservatives on many of the issues we hold dear. The president is a stalwart on life issues and has been unwavering in his support of a ban on partial birth abortions. The president has been equally strong in putting forward judicial nominees who respect the Constitution and who will not legislate from the bench. The president is a leader in the war on terror, and I can think of no one better suited to occupy the oval office in this time of turmoil. The best way to fight for the conservative agenda is to fight for the reelection of President George W. Bush.

[ravingnutter]

The best hope for the immigration issue and border security is for conservatives to work diligently for President Bush's reelection and to demand sensible immigration reform from members of Congress. The real work on immigration will be done in Congress.

This para deserves to be repeated over and over again. Congress makes laws, not the President. Write your Congresscritters in support of H.R. 3534 (introduced by Rep. Tom Tancredo)

[Right_in_Virginia]

MEGA BTTT!!!!!

[Capitalist Eric]

Following the events of September 11, 2001, border security should be of the utmost concern, and promoting programs that not only potentially weaken security but also reward illegal behavior is just plain wrong.

This truth, however, does not seem to get through the head of W. Contemporary national security depends not only on succeeding in the War On Terrorism, but also sealing our borders, and kicking the illegal aliens out. W. has done well on the War on Terror, yet turns around and proposes to destroy our national sovereignty- all, it seems, to garner the votes of illegals who will never vote for him, anyway...

If one of our core values is no longer being observed by our elected officials, then feelings of anger and betrayal are understandable and justified.

If an employee of mine is doing the exact opposite of what he is supposed to be doing, he will be fired. Why is W. different?

Both Kerry and Edwards favor amnesty for illegal immigrants and would open the flood gates on America's already porous borders.... The best hope for the immigration issue and border security is for conservatives to... demand sensible immigration reform from members of Congress. The real work on immigration will be done in Congress.

Since W. chooses to blatantly ignore the people who voted for him, he runs the risk of being fired. If he is fired, than regardless of whether Kerry or Edwards is in the White House, the conservatives in Congress will get the clear message: do not attempt to sell us out, unless you, too, want to be fired.

If it requires W. to be sacked, before Congress gets the message...? Fine.

Kerry presidency means spending restraint by the Executive Branch goes right out the window.

Since there is no spending restraint with W., this is a nonsensical argument.

The conservative movement needs a voice, and it needs a leader.

I'm still waiting...

The best way to fight for the conservative agenda is to fight for the reelection of President George W. Bush.

Suppose you have two M&M candies, one red, and the other is green... And someone tells you to choose which is tastier, what will you say? Under the superficial food-dye, they are identical. This is the choice we'll be faced with, in November, '04. Kerry, Edwards, Bush.....? Since any one of them will sign off on pork-filled budgets, and attempt to destroy what's left of our national sovereignty, there is only one way to send a clear message to Congress, to back off of the alien amnesty:

Sack BUSH.

[woerm]

ping,

laundry list of gripes to follow,
spending and immigration are pretty low on the list of misconduct.

what part of support and defend the constution did he miss.

details later...
r

[motzman]

As a conservative, my objective is to defeat liberalism, not make an empty gesture to posterity.

Defeating economic and social liberalism and National Defense / Security are by far the most important issues of our times. I simply cannot understand any Republican over 30 not getting this fact. All of these other issues are secondary :
1) Abortion
2)Guns
3)Prescription Drugs (love the stealth MSA's--they will play a big role in defeating economic liberalissm in the future)
3)Immigration (and W's "proposals" when enacted will be quite different then the hysterics would make you think)
4) War on Drugs
5) School vouchers

These 5 are just examples of what need to be changed or reformed by popular support, not by edict. What I really like about W is (for good or bad)that he is very responsive to the people (not just those who voted for him). He's doing what he said he'd do, and he's giving the elecorate what they want, responsibly. Which is why you see the outrageous hate-fest the Left is using to try to defeat W---they got nothing else!

It's now the citizens' job to convince our fellow Americans that conservatism is the way to go--but not by imposing it. That's what liberals do...which is the basic reason why they're not good.

If Republicans and conservatives don't understand or refuse to admit that the only way to defeat "liberalism" is incrementally, we're doomed.

The Constitution was specifically designed to ensure change happens incrementally, not from wild swings of policy or edict.

If W doesn't get re-elected we're in BIG trouble because:

1) Some Democrat is going to take credit for the economic surge which is underway and will continue well into the next Presidential Term
2) Said Democrat will be a two-termer
3) Our defenses will be lowered and our efforts in the WOT will be reduced
4) A massive terrorist attack would occur during the second term of said Democrat...IMHO the jihadists are biding their time--we have a tendency to look at history and such in 4 year terms, while the jihadists look in terms of decades. They have patience to wait us out.

Do we as a nation have the wisdom to understand this and stay the course?

[ChadGore]

Re: to get the message across about the immigration issue.

Isolationism doesn't work.

[Atlas Sneezed]

The anger expressed by conservatives toward President Bush is primarily focused on two issues: border security/immigration and federal spending.

Don't forget CFR.

---

And don't forget his support for extending the Clinton Gun Ban.

[ChadGore]

Re: Gridlock rules!

The people haven't sent the DNC into majority power in 2 successive elections (2000 and 2002). Why would you argue for something (Majority DNC control of the house and/or senate) that doesn't jive with the will of the people?

2000 and 2002:
1) The DNC spoke
2) The people listened and did not grant them majority power, twice.
3) You argue that their lack of a mandate is a bad thing . . . why ?

[Wolfstar]

This is a very sensible article. Thanks for posting it. As regards the following sentence: "The true test of public opinion will come once President Bush begins his campaign and America hears both sides of the story," he can't start campaigning soon enough for me. I am already sick of hearing "Democrats, this" and "Democrats, that." Yuck! I never like ceding any ground to them.

[e_engineer]

conservatives President Bush must wake up and smell the coffee.

The GOP shouldn't be telling us how to vote, they should be asking us how to win our votes.

Power flows FROM the people to the elected leaders not the other way around.

[Sloth]

Why would you argue for something (Majority DNC control of the house and/or senate) that doesn't jive with the will of the people?

Where did you get that?

[ChadGore]

Re: but also sealing our borders

Isolationism doesn't work.

[Grut]

If conservatives sit this election out, at least as far as the Presidency is concerned, it will have three effects:

1) The new, Democratic President will try to grow government wildly for four or eight years. So? Been there, done that, survived and it's good for the T-shirt trade.

2) GOP candidates in subsequent elections, and GOP Presidents in subsequent administrations, will have to pay conservatives something besides lip service.

3) Conservatives will be able to smugly wonder aloud, without blushing, at how Blacks keep supporting a party that gives them nothing.

By all means, vote for Republicans for Congress: turning the whole government over to the Dems would invite disaster. But vote for 'no one' for President because the only vote we can really cast is the one we take away from RINOs who think they already own it.

[Capitalist Eric]

Isolationism doesn't work.

Isolationism is not the same thing as maintaining national sovereignty. Nice try.

We should do on our Southern border, what Mexico does on their Southern border...

[Capitalist Eric]

By all means, vote for Republicans for Congress: turning the whole government over to the Dems would invite disaster. But vote for 'no one' for President because the only vote we can really cast is the one we take away from RINOs who think they already own it.

BINGO!!!

[NeoCaveman]

We should do on our Southern border, what Mexico does on their Southern border...

BTTT!