Who says George W. Bush has done "nothing" for conservatives?

WhiteHouse.gov; various news sources ^ | 1/27/04

[StoneColdGOP]

Karl Rove is NOT involved! Why do some of you choose to believe that Karl Rove is the boogey man behind everything you don't like? He is a very busy man and does not run Congressional campaigns -- doesn't have time. Not to mention in his job in the White House, he is not permitted to do a lot of things he is accused of doing.

Because Rove is involved. Any political advisor worth his salt has his hand in more projects than it evident on the surface. And just because someone is not permitted to engage in activity doesn't mean it won't happen. Republicans and Democrats are both guilty of that.

As for his time, Rove spent a great deal of time ensuring that the California Republican Party's activist-volunteer base was unseated and that the power in the CRP was given to the Board of Directors, a body led by Bush's handpicked viceroy Gerry Parsky. It was Parsky's job to quell (conservative) dissent and "professionalize" (water down) the volunteer and conservative strength of the Party.

Why would Rove or anyone else want Tancredo challenged when he can win another election? They want Republicans not mind numbed robots in the House. Going against Tancredo could cost them a seat and they would NEVER do that! They favor incumbents if you haven't taken the time to check and last I checked Tancredo was an incumbent!

Simple, he wants an adeherent to the Bush Code of Loyalty. Tancredo speaks the truth and isn't afraid of someone just because he's the Party's de facto leader. And, Tancredo's seat is safe Republican, anybody who wins the nomination goes to Congress.

Rove would consider Tancredo's ouster an addition to the loyal numbers of Bush House Republicans that would go along with amnesty, overspending, etc.

[George W. Bush]

Karl Rove is NOT involved! Why do some of you choose to believe that Karl Rove is the boogey man behind everything you don't like?

This is thread is not the place to review it but you should look back on what happened to the conservatives on the Texas state school board. And they weren't the only ones.

Most have forgotten about it. But I haven't.

Yes, Rove can do it. What do you think a political adviser does anyway?

[arasina]

Here's a MINI-ZOT for you.

[onyx]

Let me see if I have this right.

President Bush doesn't deserve re-election because:

1. of his recent immigration PROPOSAL.

2. TRUE CONSERVATIVES are upset over his "BIG GOVERNMENT SPENDING"

3. He wasn't honest with us over CFR.

4. SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE said he will strenuously push for a more restrictive AWB.

Do I have it?

I only ask because this thread lists 119 individual accomplishments.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I think you've got it right! And, Neets, one more thang --

this is not an immigration thread, despite attempts to hijack it.

[TruthNtegrity]

This is good stuff. Thanks for the ping.

I copied it out into a document on my PC as sometimes, I just can't get to a thread on FR.

This will supply LOTS of ammunition for the crowd that lists 2 or 3 things they think the President has done for Conservatives, that ends with a big "BUT" and on and on they go.

Now I can reply with numerous positives for every argument they have against the President.

This is going to be a very long election year, but I feel that there are those of us who are getting ready.

[Ophiucus]

Not to mention the Hopewell and Adena trading with the Anasazi right here on this continent........

LOL...ok, so what's this evil globalization? I'm going to start looking for guys in old surplus gas masks.....

[Southack]

"He proposed to legalize millions of Illegal Aliens. Doesn't matter how the hairs are split, it's an Amnesty, just like the last big one."

I realize that this is your core issue, and I grant that you make valid points regarding this issue...

But you are misusing the word "amnesty."

You might as well label every plea bargain between every local prosecutor and crook as "amnesty" as to abuse the word so with regard to Bush's illegal alien registration plan.

Bush's plan, while much maligned, would give us something that we *don't* have today: 8 million Registered illegals.

You don't gain such institutional government knowlege cheaply, either. Bush had to give something up to entice illegals to Register themselves. Some posters on this forum even claim that Bush hasn't given up enough to entice very many illegals to register (an interesting complaint, really).

Once registered, illegals can be dealt with en masse. On the other hand, trying to come up with the resources required to locate 8 million crooks who are all anonymous and who are all on the lam (as are these illegals) would be quite an undertaking (and rounding them up into internment camps would make earlier European WW2 efforts seem small in contrast and in terms of bad publicity).

But with Bush's plea bargain, illegals can pay their fine, register, and then they get a blue card and the right to work here for 3 years. Of course, they have to deport themselves at the end of that period in order to apply for more time here...and Bush's plan gives them the incentive to do that, as well as establishes a Registry that will aid our law enforcement in rounding up those who don't comply.

That's hardly "amnesty." Sure, there might be better ways to deal with illegals, but this plan isn't all bad...and it isn't a completely free amnesty.

[alnick]

Is there more government surveilance of my activities or less?

It's pretty safe to assume that the level of government surveillance of your activities has remained the same -- zero.

[Tamzee]

The number one issue in this election is national security. We are at war with a group of Islamic terrorists who want to destroy this nation and Western Civilization. Not one of the democrats (except possibly Lieberman) would prosecute the war on terror, and Lieberman isn't going to get the nomination.

To elect a democrat means we lose Cheney, Rice, and RUMNSFELD. It means we have the horrible Rat appointees in all cabinet positions, such as a Janet Reno type as Attorney General. It means that we will have a democrat for Secretary of State, and if you don't think Bill Clinton wants that job, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

I do not want another Ruth Bader Ginsberg appointed to the Supreme Court. I don't want a Sandy Berger type asNational Security Advisor. I don't want to see taxes raised, the UN kissed up to, and France appeased.

I want the military funded and not turned into a social experiment. I want my grandchildren to be able to worship at their Lutheran church and I don't want my granddaughters wearing burkhas!!

Spending and domestic policy can be reversed by future Coongressional action. Foreign policy and defense actions, on the other hand, are controlled exclusively by the executive branch, and a Rat in charge would risk the safety of this nation.

I support the President, I am proud to, and I think those who are threatening to go third party or stay home are supporting the Rats, willingly or not. It is a foolish and dangerous position.

I agree, LucyJo... these comments by Miss Marple speak for many of us. Thank you, Miss Marple, for expressing our sentiments with such eloquence :-)

[GailA]

Mine too, I just may have to get some Iron on transfer paper and make me a T shirt out of it.

[Neets]

Quite an intellectually honest post SH.

Very good.

If we don't start tackling the illegal aliens sooner, rather than later, or regretably no do anything about it at all, it can only get worse.

How else to explain the 8 million illegals we have now?

[Wolfstar]

Ever talk to someone who lives near the border?

I live in the Los Angeles area. I am more than familiar with the problems caused by illegal immigration. I am opposed to the President's proposal. Nevertheless, illegal immigration is not a central focus for me as it is for you and others who post on this forum. I will proudly cast my vote for Bush-Cheney come November.

[LucyJo]

Thank you, Wolfstar, and thank you once again for providing the organized compilation of facts.

[Sabertooth]

But you are misusing the word "amnesty."

< -snip- >

That's hardly "amnesty." Sure, there might be better ways to deal with illegals, but this plan isn't all bad...and it isn't a completely free amnesty.

I edited the part where you misused the term "plea bargain," because we've been over that.

Wanted to get to the part at the end: "it isn't a completely free amnesty."

I've never said it was.

Amnesties don't have to be "completely free" to be Amnesties.

Amnesties frequently have conditions, those are called "conditional Amnesties."

The conditions of the Bush Amnesty are very close to the conditions of the Reagan Amnesty.

[PhiKapMom]

I do have one for you that I thought was funny and shows how the Democrats are going into other States pretending to be from there.

These three Clark people show up at my door (stupid state moved their primary up to 3 Feb), I looked at their badges and said no way. The female says who are you going to vote for in the Democrat primary? I looked at her like what? I said we are a Republican household -- all of us are registered as Republicans. She says "No you are not! It says right here on this page you are a Democrat." I about dropped and then told her to get a new list of registered voters. She said it was unnecessary because no one in my precinct supported Bush the selected President anyways. At that point I asked them where they were from -- they gave the wrong proununication of the town, so I said where are you REALLY from? Finally the guy admitted NY.

I almost went ballistic. I told them in no uncertain terms (not very ladylike) to go back to NY and tell Hillary what I thought of her and her candidate. They left immediately! I guess they are going to mark me down as a NO for Clark!

That means we have out of state people from the RATs (NY) pretending to be from Oklahoma.

Figure the Republicans for Dean group are the same way. Actually if there are such Republicans wish they would become Democrats.

[Ophiucus]

Seems to me a general conservative principle is a preference for as much localized control as possible, and the least diffusion of power to remote institutions as possible.

That sounds close to the basis of libertarian-conservatism. A federal-conservatism would be strong but limited central control with all else deferred to localized control.

But I see where you're going with limited federal control, limited global control.

Kyoto, the UN, and the ICC would be examples of Globalism opposed by conservatism.

Ok, I can see that. But are you leaving out the 'global' corporations and trade? And where would NATO fit in?

[Sabertooth]

If we don't start tackling the illegal aliens sooner, rather than later, or regretably no do anything about it at all, it can only get worse.

How else to explain the 8 million illegals we have now?

The Reagan Amnesty.

How do you explain these incoming Illegals...?

In the San Diego sector of the border "we have two to three times the number we had a few weeks ago," Senior Border Patrol Agent Shawn Moran told HUMAN EVENTS. Moran is spokesman for the local San Diego chapter of the National Border Patrol Council, the patrolmen's union.

"In one place, we have eight times," said Moran.

Asked if this could just be a seasonal increase, Moran replied, "We usually get something of an increase at this time of year, but nothing like this." The trend showed no signs of abating, he said.

Moran says he is certain Bush's plan is motivating the illegal aliens who have caused the spike in illegal border crossings. "Because 95% of the people we're catching say that's why," Moran said. "They say they're coming for the amnesty. A lot of these people have not been caught before. They have no immigration histories."

Moran also said the Bush proposal has caused a change in the urgency and demography of illegal border crossers. "We're catching them repeatedly throughout the week," Moran said. "They're desperate to get this amnesty even though we told them it's only a proposal. . . . We're catching more women and children than we have since 1999."
Bush's Amnesty Plan Triggers Jump in Illegal Immigration
HUMAN EVENTS (FR link) - January 27, 2004 - Joseph A. D'Agostino

[Wolfstar]

Southack, re your #607, brilliantly stated. Thanks for teaching me some things about the President's proposal that I didn't know. The House is not going to touch this issue with a 10-foot pole this year, but the registry idea does sound like a good one.

[George W. Bush]

But notice it was about the Republican primaries where we all got in flame wars. It was Republican against Republican for the most part especially after Pat went to Reform.

Absolutely. I think I'm about the only one who stayed Republican but then, voter registration is meaningless here anyway. In the end, only a few of the Brigade voted Pat. The rest of us voted Bush and worked the Floriduh thing with everyone else, Buchanan's nasty attempt to argue that his Floriduh votes actually belonged to Gore being the final straw(!!!). Along with the impeachment, those were FR's finest moments actually.

Republicans don't have a real primary this time around but some of these posters never show up on the threads about the Democrat candidates and trash them. That is where it looks really odd -- only trash Pres Bush but no DemocRATs.

I probably don't get around enough to notice. But then, without our own primary or a threat to gun rights, people have to have something to do. FR is, by its nature and entire history, combative. We...um...tend to attract a certain type of voter/activist, if you hadn't noticed.

As to your other remarks, I think the greater threat to Bush and especially to downstream candidates will not be third-party or crossovers. It'll be the stay-homes, 3 million in 2000 and a number that keeps growing among the GOP base according to Rove. I keep telling myself I don't have a good reason to vote since Bush will take my state (or at least my congressional district) anyway and the state candidate I hate most is going to win the governorship if he even hints he wants it. But by fall, I'll have a burr up my butt about something and race to the polls to vote against something, certain that the fate of the free world hangs upon it. But then, I don't ever end up voting for anyone unless I see something positive in it, otherwise, it's a blank ballot, something that shocks the old people who count the votes. But they only whisper among themselves and I wouldn't care if it was open-ballot instead of secret-ballot anyway. I don't give a crap what anyone else thinks of my voting.

Uh-oh. Getting a little too honest here.

[nopardons]

BRAVO !

Your responses to this thread, have all been pricise, well said, factual, and spot on. :-)