State of the Union: In jeopardy

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review ^ | Tuesday, January 20, 2004 | editorial

[KEVLAR]

Thanks for the kind words.

[eskimo]

Wow, notibly absent from this post is any input from any Dem/GOP groupies.

Do you suppose they are all at the party "regroup" meetings?

[section9]

What I suspect is this.

For the past six months, Dean has driven the center of the Democratic Party away from the center itself. Well, as night follows day, this left the center open to Bush and Rove. Bush's spending programs are designed to hold that center and force Kerry, Edwards, or Dean to run to Bush's left.

These three can't call for less government spending, they can only call for more! Bush can claim that compared to what, say, an Edwards might offer, he is the model of restraint. Bush can (and will) say that he believes in helping people in need, but one must be careful to watch the growth of government programs. To keep the base jazzed, especially the resentful Deanies, any Dem will have to run left to prevent Naderization.

Let's look at several issues that prove my point:

1. From Willie Green on down, virtually everyone is wondering how Bush is going to pay for pills for granny. What no one understood is that the Democrats have resurrected Hillarycare, Canadacare, and other NHS-type hijinks designed to make medical care a state run operation. Bush is for a limited program for prescription drugs. Democrats will have to outbid him to satisfy their base and keep all those Roosevelt Democrats in line. Your average Deanie believes that the Democratic Party should offer National Health. Most liberals think that Hillarycare was the triumph of wisdom. Like water in a canyon, the Democrats will follow the path of least resistance.

2. The border. Okay, someone had to give voice to the "Mexicans Under the Bed" subtext that has been plagueing FR these past months. But again, Bush has stolen the center. That's what the Reed Irvine crowd doesn't get. Tom Tancredo wants to round 'em up and deport them. All that would do is drive Latinos of all stripes into Ratland. Instead, Bush's program is a limited form of amnesty. The Democrats, pressured by the Aztlan crowd, will press for full amnesty. La Raza will be a group of happy campers after the Boston Convention. The voting center will not be, however. They will see Bush's program as restrained compared to what's going to come out of the mouths of Democrats. Again, this will happen as night follows day.

3. Everybody except Lieberman was anti-war. Lieberman is almost history. That leaves the Democratic Party in "BUSH EQUALS HITLER" land while Bush, not being Hitler, once again occupies the center.

The Right will threaten to take its ball home until they see what the Democrats offer. Then they will vote for Bush.

As night follows day.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[eskimo]

These three can't call for less government spending, they can only call for more! Bush can claim that compared to what, say, an Edwards might offer, he is the model of restraint.

Who, in hell, is going to believe that?

[Willie Green]

Many simply prefer to pretend that editorials expressing legitimate conservative dissension don't exist.

[Kryptonite]

It is not surprising at all that the only rebuttal you can offer is a scathing personal attack intended to deflect attention away from its substance. The majority of more thoughtful participants on this forum can see right through such adolescent tactics.

The child you speak of has a history of such temper tantrums.

[eskimo]

The child you speak of has a history of such temper tantrums.

No child was spoken of, just a childish demeanor evident in many posts here.

[section9]

Most voters. Especially since it will have the virtue of being true. Compared to the Dems, Bush will look moderate.

You win campaigns by appealing to the middle voter while holding on to your base. You do not win campaigns by running on Pat Buchanan's platform.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Kryptonite]

Sure, not literally a child.

[eskimo]

You win campaigns by appealing to the middle voter while holding on to your base.

The base is being ignored and the GOPs myopic view of the middle of the spectrum is growing increasingly narrow. Foolish, very foolish.

[CyberAnt]

I think you have your "facts" backwards. President Bush is KNOWN FOR WANTING DISSENT!! Sorry .. your comment about "ourcrys being screened out" just will not hold water. Better luck next time.

And .. where do you get this "GW is allowed" stuff. Nobody "allows" the President .. the President directs what happens - not the other way around. And .. GW doesn't read editorials because he doesn't want to waste his time reading all the trash people write about him. So far .. you're batting 1000 in incorrect assumptions.

And .. you are assuming wrongly .. like the democrats .. that the President is not aware of what people are saying. If the President only did things according to what the people were saying (polls), he would be just another Clinton (who never did anything until polls had been taken to see what the public wanted).

You obviously don't trust the President! Soooo! That is YOUR PROBLEM and not the President's.

[woodyinscc]

Who, in hell, is going to believe that?

Apparently not you, but thinking like yours has never advanced one conservative issue. Too advance an issue or an agenda, you have to be elected. All recent polls show President Bush holding a 90% approval among Republicans. These people are his base, not the LP or the Constitution Party. Do you seriously think if President Bush goes down in defeat, it will advance any of your issues? The dims will take a one vote victory, and turn it into a mandate for all things liberal.(including Judges)

[MissAmericanPie]

I call the White House and ask to speak to the comment line. A nice young man tries not to sound bored as he listens to your complaint.

[raybbr]

And millions of loyal Bush followers will be listening intently:

[e_engineer]

FR has always been a gathering place for an element of miserable eunuchs, only now they have 60,000 or so FR "sleeper" accounts they've established since 2000 to play with.

Pure BS. Prove it Fufkin! (and I'm not talking about the eunuch part.)

They're attempting to create a completely phony groundswell here, totally manufactured to execute a charade for outside observers and media sorts who visit here.

Or maybe there's a real groundswell that you are trying to discredit with your unsubstantiated claims.

They're annoying and bastards, but utterly unsophisticated and irrelevant.

You can flatter us all day, but it won't win us over.

[WOSG]

Brilliant analysis, CommonTator.

oh, the tyranny of unreasonable expectations!

But Willie, dont change who you are. The world has been remade many times by the 'unreasonable people' of the world. And sometimes, even, for the better.

[eskimo]

Apparently not you, but thinking like yours has never advanced one conservative issue.

One must be able to recognize a conservative issue before one can advance that issue.

[ninenot]

and they bolt for a more democratic form of government.

Using their personal arms which they have in great quantity in their straw huts

...to counteract the forces of the Red Army, huh?

Tiananmen Square: ever hear of it? Know what happened to all those cute little protestors?

[ninenot]

You specialize in conclusions which have no basis in evidence.

Bush's base was perfectly happy WITHOUT 400 Zillion in new Medicare, 14 million "amnestized" illegals, and WITHOUT a space-station Moon/colony Mars.

The Democrats HAVE no center: Kerry will lean left and will self-destruct, and Clark, the Clintooons' choice, is absolutely stark raving mad!

Repeat: your conclusions are delusions.

[ninenot]

Ahhhh-read the news. Paul Weyrich and Grover Norquist, as well as Club for Growth, are VERY restive under BigSpenderBush's watch.