So you think George W. Bush is not a conservative?

SOTU transcript ^ | 1/22/04

[ravingnutter]

You said "her" so I assumed you were talking about Protagoras. I was replying from the "my comments" page, so it was easy to get confused. As far as Bikers4Bush goes, yes what he was stating was hearsay...BUT...Howlin called the Senators in question and was told that it was disinformation (and even offered to give B4B the numbers to call to verify it for himself), it should have ended there. Bikers4Bush would not back down from his assertion even in the face of facts presented to him, that is why he got flamed. We need to preserve the integrity of this forum and those that go around spreading disinformation such as B4B do not help an already volatile situation.

[honeygrl]

I don't think B4B ever stated it as a fact, just discussed it as a possibility.

[honeygrl]

"The double entendre is claiming you are for true conservatives but declaring your opposition to the only conservative President we have had in the WH since Ronald Reagan "

Just because he is Republican, doesn't automatically make him a conservative. Aren't conservatives supposed to support smaller government and less socialism? How has Bush worked to achieve those goals? What exactly makes him the most conservative President since Reagan? Certainly not his spending habits.

[Wolfstar]

You are most welcome, Bigg Red. And may I say that I love your screen name for two reasons: First, that one of my all-tine favorite sports figures was the great racehorse, Secretariat. Big Red was his nickname. Second, because I once rescued a red Doberman who was a really big guy. He was the sweetest dog, despite his size. I named him Red.

[CMAC51]

Actually, I live in a state (Virginia) that has had a pretty stiff testing system for years -- tougher than what Bush wants. Teacher resistance has already been overcome and the system is in place. But now Bush wants us to jump through some other hoops and he wants us to dig up the tax money to do it. Well what if we want to spend that money on something else, like replacing crumbling buildings? In my view, the federal government has absolutely no business or right to tell local school systems what to do. I thought that was the conservative view?

Interesting, what might some of those hoops be? I don't claim to be a total expert on the bill, so there may be things I am unaware of.

Actually the federal government does have the right and in my opinion the necessity to establish national standards of measurement including in education. The courts have indicated that constitutionally it falls under the commerce clause. There are national standards for weights, measures, time, and a whole host of other things. That's why a pound of bread in New York weighs the same as a pound of bread in Colorado. Setting a national standard for the minimum requirements for a High School diploma creates level of equivalency between the states. How the state meets the standard being up to the state would be the conservative way. Having the standard to measure against is also conservative.

[skip2myloo]

Actually, I have no problem with a national standard for accreditation of public schools.

But, where are all these billions of dollars going that have nothing to do with accreditation??

How do school lunches and school vouchers fit into an accreditation scheme??How about Titles I, IX and XIX - what do they have to do with accreditation??

[George W. Bush]

M.A.Pie: The average American is toiling just to make it through the day, much less pay attention to politics in D.C. I try to educate those around me, like a warning bell. Get them involved is all I know to do and hope they influence their circle of family and friends.

Well, it's a little difficult to say that our ancestors were less busy than we are, given the circumstances of their lives. They still made time to maintain the republic. We don't much excuse if we let it slip away. If people would rather watch reality TV shows instead of giving a crap about their rights as citizens, they don't get much sympathy from me.

I always recommend joining the Liberty Committee. We don't win every time. But it has been a remarkably effective grassroots activist organization.

I would say that Liberty Committee has an influence comparable to that of Gun Owners Of America or the ACLU.

[CMAC51]

Actually, I have no problem with a national standard for accreditation of public schools. But, where are all these billions of dollars going that have nothing to do with accreditation?? How do school lunches and school vouchers fit into an accreditation scheme??How about Titles I, IX and XIX - what do they have to do with accreditation??

Since I have been discussing this on several threads, I cannot recall specifically whether I made this point in our discussion or not, but from my observations of GWB in Texas, it is typical for GWB to let the other side get what they think they want while he gets what he really wants. Any fiscal conservative, including myself, would readily point to the education bill and say it spends too much money. However, that was the hook that reeled in the other side. The most important part of that bill, the one that liberals will learn to hate as it slowly wrenches the education issue from their grasp is testing. Testing creates accountability. Liberalism dies a slow death in the face of accountability because it cannot produce measurable result.

When the education bill was signed, I listened for days as Conservatives berated GWB for signing it. I just hoisted my glass in a toast to GWB because as far as education goes, liberals had just opened the screen door and let in the dog that was going to consume them.

The Titles Roman Numeral are not conservative in nature and are hardly GWB's doing. The latest bill may have massaged them, but they have been around gnawing at education for years now.

Vouchers are conservative in nature because they provide personal choice. They needed to be addressed at the national level because many states us Federal dollars as the hook to prevent implementation of voucher programs. GWB is a firm believer in parental choice. Getting it implemented is not going to be a straight line path.

[George W. Bush]

Bush's spending increased from Clinton's. IOW, he was essentially saying that Clinton didn't spend enought. Really, what more needs to be said?

Don't look to me to defend the big-government spending of this Congress, aided and abetted by the president. Far from it.

I was only pointing out it's more accurate to assess it as percentages of growth/decline in relation to the GDP.

Just a stats comment. The list was a good contribution to the subject at hand.

What I was getting at was that the numbers might actually be even worse than your list revealed. Not that I need a worst-case picture, it's bad enough already. But we should always look for the fairest and strongest set of figures to make our case.

[Paulus Invictus]

The RAT's immigration proposals are much worse. They say they would open the borders indiscriminately to all "poor and oppressed." Who has a better plan?

[x]

So, what's the bottom line?

I wish I had one. It's probably true that each party has about a 38% base of the public that will vote for it. But just who those voters are will vary from candidate to candidate. McGovern, Carter, and Mondale or Dukakis, Clinton, and Humphrey or Ford and Reagan all had somewhat different personal bases, so if you're looking for a bedrock of actual voters who'll go for the party regardless of candidate the figure may be different.

The country tends to split along those 1/3 Democrat 1/3 Republican 1/3 Independent or 38 38 24 lines, and you do have to crack that 24% to win. Clinton had to triangulate to get those votes in the center. Reagan didn't have to do that -- at least not in any obvious or explicit way.

Triangulation may be a product of an era where the two parties split that center swing vote right down the middle. It's a tricky move to win those necessary extra swing votes without alienating other voters. But politicians have always tried to position themselves as moderates to win the middle. Eisenhower did just that. Johnson was able to make major changes in the country by claiming to be the one person who could control the forces of change (It didn't work for him, but did for FDR).

Does Bush have to triangulate to win? Is he doing it already? I don't know, but he's certainly going after those swing voters.

The interesting question is whether a Democrat like Edwards or Clark could bring a different personal base to the campaign and change the electoral landscape. I really doubt it. They have to do too much to win over party liberals to be able to sway Southern moderates or conservatives in the general election. But one day, a Democrat may be able to do just that, as Carter did in 1976.

On paper, Lieberman and Gephardt may have looked like the strongest candidates: the ones who could win centrists and disaffected ordinary working class voters, but nothing worked for them. So maybe no Democrat is going to be able to make an end run and snag an important voting bloc this year.

[MissAmericanPie]

I'll check it out. Our founders found their entertainment in books and their discussion. Now if knowledge or getting ones point across takes more attention than will fit in a capsule the listeners attention span goes south.

[zook]

"This kind of gross ignorance will not be rewarded. Do your homework. I'm not your crutch."

Oh my. Now I know what I'm dealing with. Someone who knows really nothing about the Constitution. Have you made it out of the 8th grade yet? Ok, here goes. There is no line in the document barring military action sans declaration of war. There is nothing requiring a declaration of war. The only regulation is that Congress holds the power to pass one.

If you'd like more information on the US Constitution, visit your local library. Or better still, keep watching Justice League on Cartoon Network.

[zook]

"Surely you can assemble better arguments."

I've blown all your arguments to smitherines. That's like a tangerine, only smaller, to suit your intellect.

[zook]

"There were literally thousands of posts here at FR calling for nuking Afghanistan, all the Arab lands, turning them into parking lots, turning them into a sea of glass, etc. "

Thousands of posts? I was reading FR at the time and I believe you are, at best, mistaken. And as far as Al Qaida reading FR, that's not the point. For each pusstifer, wusstifer, chunky monkey, and buggly ugly muttering mouthfuls of rubbish about Bush here on FR, there are thousands more doing so on the street and in the media. The portrait leads Al Qaida to doubt our resolve. The more they doubt, the more they will kill.

I'll continue to blast all these aid and comfort givers out of the water, lest anyone reading, hearing, or seeing, doubt our nation's willingness to defend itself.

[zook]

Hi, and thanks for reading! Yep, I'm something of a novelty in my department, though there are at least two other Republicans besides me in my college.

[gatorbait]

By campaigning for it in 2000. By pledging to sign it if Boxer and the Dims could pass it.

I think he said ,"IF it crosses my desk,I'll sign it. Hardly a ringing endorsement for the AWB,and,frankly,it was a very subtle way of dodging overwhelming bad press and kept the militia idiots off the front page as well. Secondly,we had some idiots on this forum bragging about knocking out a couple of Senators, notably Slade Gorton of Washington,who was pro 2a.We got Maria Cantwell instead. Yep, voting third party or staying home sure was a positive thing to do, huh? Meanwhile,Delay held the line as he was expected to do,and that worked well. I'd be willing to bet that AWB won't be crossing his desk,either . However, if enough whiners decide to stand on "principle",maybe it will cross the next Democrat's desk. He, the principled can wallow in their righteousness though, so that will be the upside. It'll really teach us all a lesson.

Outside of that,a lovely day, wasn't it?

[gatorbait]

And I'm not sure how Perot enters into it.

Simple, he was and remains, a blatant liar and a full fledged lunatic. I know you must burst with pride thinking about Perot's handiwork

[gatorbait]

Skip,I hope a HUGE number of the true believers read this.We had something similar happen in our gubanatorial race recently. The handiwork of their actions is just starting to be felt.Not in a good way, save ,they held onto their idealogical and ethnic purity.

Thanks for the article,very timely.

[gatorbait]

Seriously now, do you think this man would be spouting this stuff if it were not already a done deal under the table?

You're right ,we are all doomed.Thank God I kept my peso futures intact.