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

SOTU transcript ^ | 1/22/04

[looscnnn]

Did we say to vote for a Dem? Come on, say it with me, nooooooo. I knew you could. We could all vote for Tancredo or someone else like him.

[inquest]

lol - if both extremists hate him, then he MUST be doing something right.

You actually give the Democrats that much credibility? By the way, you'll notice as well that the Palestinians stepped up their terror campaign as Israel was becoming more conciliatory. Perhaps you'll see a parallel.

[onyx]

Ah yes, the blue base, standing on its 'pouting-purist-point.' Let's Roll.

[skip2myloo]

Actually, we are in absolute agreement. I too am a strict constituionalist - but, I have a practical side.

As someone said (Winston Churchill ?), Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

To me, GWB is the worst candidate, except for all the others who are running.

[BJClinton]

Have you bought a money order for $3K or more, if so - it was reported to the Feds.

Just curious, how am I reported to the Feds? I use cash and no ID.

[RiflemanSharpe]

Proposing it is enough for me, it was the straw combined with his other socalist policies that broke the camels back for me.

[B4Ranch]

Continually hiding from the truth must be a tough way to live.

[PhiKapMom]

Pres Bush is pushing for permanent tax cuts! Bad analogy IMO! Not to mention and I hate to say this, President Bush #41 did not run a very energetic campaign and the campaign of Clinton was energetic (even though full of lies). Clinton got people convinced they needed a younger man as President -- one who was hip and "soccer" Moms fell for him hook, line, and sinker. Not to mention the Perot factor. Please don't tell me that Perot didn't make a difference. I know lifelong Republicans that regret voting for little big ears because they didn't know the "real" Ross Perot.

Big difference between 1992 and 2004 -- 9/11 happened and America was attacked on her own soil by terrorists that destroyed the WTC's, damaged the Pentagon, and killed/injured thousands of people.

Pres Bush #41 lost because he didn't keep his promise of NO NEW TAXES! If you will go back and see the agenda that Pres Bush ran on in 2000, you will see that he is keeping his promises. Like it or not, he is doing domestically like he said he would do in the campaign and what he believes in his heart is best for America.

[Howlin]

Bump to that. We use them here in North Carolina!

[citizen]

...That is, if one allows themselves to critically examine the President's policies, rather than blindly following or ignoring all facts that indicate he's no conservative.

I can't say Bush is NO conservative, he does have some conservative chips on his side of the ledger. On some social values issues, he's standing firm. He genuinely appreciates our troops home and abroad. He's prosecuting the WOT abroad, in other words, doing his job as C-in-C.

Bush is more properly classified just as he says - a Compassionate Conservative. This faux conservatism apparently condones spending taxpayer money wildly on big government programs in an effort to buy various groups' votes. This faux conservatism apparently favors NAFTA for half the world and an open borders policy - an obvious and serious national security failure. This faux conservatism apparently believes in a selective adherence to the Articles of the Constitution. This faux conservatism apparently believes in a selective enforcement of the rule of law. Fully upholding all of the Constitution and enforcing all laws might cost this Compassionate Conservative some votes. This faux conservatism apparently believes that the permanent importation of a massive low-skilled and very low-paid workforce is good for America (also their families come, soon to be classified as the working poor deserving of taxpayer assistance).

The stack of chips on Bush's side of the conservative ledger is looking awfully small.

[skip2myloo]

Then the bank is not complying with the new rule, its CC I think.

[MJY1288]

Spot on

[Howlin]

We could all vote for Tancredo or someone else like him.

Why would you vote for a man who doesn't want your vote?

[woodyinscc]

Really? I have been told that we are a small and insignificant group, thus our votes will not affect the outcome of the election. If this is truly the case, then your rants are due to paranoia. After all, why else would you rant about something small and insignificant?

I will not get into a p-----g contest with you. Your arguments are specious, and are tending to show that, yes you are small and insignificant. Not one of your thought processes has done one thing to further a conservative issue.!

[Southack]

"Enact Conservative Legislation by reducing the size and scope of government, getting rid of the host of liberal BS that has been passed or you (The Republican Party) have lost my vote forever."

If Dr. Planned Parenthood himself won the election in 2004, legalized abortion on demand for all time, but balanced our federal budget and cut federal spending by abolishing our military, he would have accomplished your stated goal above of reducing the size and scope of government.

But it would NOT be conservative in any way, shape or form.

Thus, what you claim to want contrasts with who you say that you are: i.e. a "conservative."

[Mo1]

They're indistinguishable from Democrats in that regard.

Good point

[Diddle E. Squat]

Excellent post. Good work, and just ignore the single-issue, sit-at-home-and-pout freeloaders who claim to be the most pious conservatives but depend on the rest of us to vote for a winner who will keep out the Trojan horse Marxists.

Principled quitters don't advance conservatism, they just make noise.

[Texas Federalist]

Just because you write the word "FACT" in big capital letters before each paragraph doesn't make your statements any less wrong.

[My2Cents]

I’ve observed these "Bush Isn't Conservative" debates on FR long enough that I’m convinced we need to acknowledge what’s going on. In reading the arguments of the Bush-Bashers, in assessing their tone and behavior in their interaction with others, we need to conclude that what we’re seeing isn’t evidence of a political ideology; what we’re seeing is evidence of a personality disorder. Consider:

The Bush-Bashers, generally, consistently exhibit certain character traits --

• Perfectionism
• Inflexibility
• Stridency and argumentativeness
• Impracticality/detachment from reality
• A tendency to view the world from the perspective of the ideal, and inability to consider practical alternatives
• Aggressiveness
• Narrow viewpoint and the inability and unwillingness to consider other viewpoints
• Inability to see the big picture
• Elitism, and a tendency to consider only their position as being the “right” one
• Rigidity and the inability to accommodate, compromise, or exhibit flexibility
• Judgmentalism and defensiveness
• Lack of civility
• Negativity
• A preference to destroy what they disagree with rather than build on previous progress
• Inability to focus on an overall goal and to work cooperatively with others toward that goal
• Individuality, to the point of personal isolation

Interestingly enough, these character traits are found in extremists of every stripe, left as well as right. These character traits seem to be common to extremists, independent of ideology, which is why their behavior and attitudes are symptomatic of a personality disorder rather than a political philosophy. In fact, many of these traits closely parallel the symptoms of Paranoid Personality Disorder as identified by the American Psychiatric Association (see http://mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=569&cn=8 for confirming information).

[Howlin]

To me, GWB is the worst candidate, except for all the others who are running.

LOL @ that....not how I would have put it, but it makes sense.