There IS a deference between not approving what he's done or said and the never ending, caustic, vile,misleading things posted against him and his supporters and the DNC talking points used here by the Bushbashers.
|
Posted on 01/26/2004 1:47:29 PM PST by 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.
"They" are listening.
There IS a deference between not approving what he's done or said and the never ending, caustic, vile,misleading things posted against him and his supporters and the DNC talking points used here by the Bushbashers.
|
Shhhhhhhhhhh...we don't really want others to know that I'm NOT really some glass chewing, mental muscled Amazon. :-)
Our President is upholding our laws. The INS is rounding up illegals every day. That work continues.
But it could be more effective, especially if there was a carrot to go along with the INS' stick.
And as I told you earlier, if you dared to attempt to answer the direct questions that I put to you in Post #466, your fragile worldview would likely be shattered. The unsaid subtext to that point being that you would almost certainly avoid those 3 questions, and that is precisely what you did in your above post where you pretended to give one fluffly, inconsequential statement rather than directly answer each of the 3 questions that I put to you in Post #466.
Because lets face it, answering those 3 questions will box you in. If you support the Registration of illegals, then you have to explain your opposition to Bush's plan that registers illegals. If you oppose Registering illegals, then you have to explain how 8 million anonymous illegals can somehow be rounded up under your plan when what we have been doing over the past 30 years along that line of reasoning hasn't worked so well.
No, rather than face your obvious disconnect from reality, you are going to continue to avoid, by any means necessary, answering those 3 questions that I directly put to you in Post #466.
Have you given up your defense of your claims already, MAP?!You seem to already be posting on other matters, rather than to support your earlier wild-eyed claims about the Patriot Act's actual legal text.
Why is that, I wonder??
Agreed.
I've no interest in the personal issues of W., or if he partied as a kid. Most of us did, and it doesn't mean diddly. With two major exceptions- the War on Terror, and the tax cuts- I have generally been unimpressed with his policies. Admittedly, I do get a certain sense of enjoyment, watching the liberals go absolutely insane over him, and constantly attempt to denigrate him, somehow make him out to be either a buffoon or a liar.
Nobody gets a Harvard MBA if they're stupid- regardless of who "daddy" is...
But... And it's a big "BUT..." The CFR bill, the increased spending, the "Leave No Child Behind" bill, the "Prescription-Drug Bill of Rights" bill (an insult to anyone with a sense of history)...? All of these things, in my opinion, stink to high Heaven... And, even with all of these atrocious acts, I still would have voted for him- I've voted straight-line Republican since I was 18... And, up until this last month, I saw no reason to change that position. Ironically, I do agree with the general thinking of ohioWfan, Southack and the rest, in that the best strategy is to vote for the most Conservative candidate, and hope for the best.
The final straw, however, that I cannot, will not abide by, and fight to my last breath, is the proposal for alien-amnesty.
The most Conservative candidate- in this particular election- is someone who has demonstrated his capability to conduct war, when necessary, to secure our National Security. And... as a military vet, I admire and appreciate that. But OTOH, he proposes to eliminate the immigration policies that (are supposed to) keep our borders "secure," thereby eliminating any illusion of National Security.
It exposes all American citizens to risk- financially, culturally and physically. These are not things that can be "interpreted." They are facts, which have already been documented ad nauseum on FR. (BTW, don't ask me to post links- the information is easily found, if one wants to learn).
That W. refuses to understand the incredible risk he would expose the entire country to, forces me to question his value as a leader... And if he continues to push alien amnesty, I will be forced to reject him.
You may disagree with me- and many do. But there are more that do agree with me, as every poll I've seen clearly indicates... To those who say I must do everything in my power to re-elect W., my response is simple: if he is fired, perhaps Congress will understand the message that some things will not be tolerated. If that message is learned (and I admit, that's a *big* "if"), then there will be no alien-amnesty bill passed in Congress... And no matter which buffoon sits in the White House, if there's no bill to sign, and sufficient votes to kill an equivalent E.O. in the Senate...? Then it'll never happen...
How many of the alien-amnesty (+ a refurbished bracero program) proponents will still support it, when the suicide-bombers start hitting shopping malls, movie-theaters, night-clubs, restaurants and elementary schools...? What will they do, when it's their children that are put at risk, all for the sake (as another poster facetiously stated) "a cheaper head of lettuce?"
I will fight anyone and everyone, who will intentionally put my country at risk. I will do my very best to maintain civility, but... But I won't quietly stand by, and let the country I've served simply be flushed down the toilet... At some point, we must make the decision to stand and fight for what we believe.
"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything."
-- Alexander Hamilton
Come on, MAP...where in the Patriot Act are court ordered warrants abolished?
Either you can support your claim or else you can't. Which is it, and will you be honest about it in the future?
No worries- you're easy to ignore.
Or are you too lazy to read?
The only thing worse is Kerry's plan (covered here today in a couple of threads) -- is to just grant outright citizenship to anyone who has been here 5 years.
Maybe, for now, the best strategy is to let Congress fight over the plan for years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.