The conservatives are outraged -- about Bush (CPAC ArticleBarf Alert)

Salon ^ | 27 Jan 04 | Michelle Goldberg

[Warrior Nurse]

The conservatives are outraged -- about Bush At the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, foot soldiers of the right rail against the big-government, free-spending ways of the White House By Michelle Goldberg

[Warrior Nurse]

Jan. 27, 2004 | CRYSTAL CITY, Va. -- Razor-tongued right-wing darling Michelle Malkin stood before a cheering crowd at the Conservative Political Action Conference Saturday and denounced George Bush's new immigration policy. Her voice oozing contempt, she described Bush as "Clintonian" for claiming to oppose amnesty in his State of the Union speech. She held up an orange sign with Bush's words, "I oppose amnesty," written on it. Then she ripped it up and roared, "What part of amnesty doesn't he understand?"

This year's CPAC, an annual conference that's ground zero of the vast right-wing conspiracy, pulsated with the usual antipathy toward liberals, gays, secular judges, environmentalists and Europeans. Yet many attendees also bristled with a more uneasy anger, one directed at their erstwhile allies in the White House. Conservative activists, especially older ones, felt betrayed and disappointed by Bush's immigration policy, his expansion of the federal government and his promiscuous spending, so much so that some suggested the grass-roots right might stay home on Election Day. There were plenty of passionate Bush fans in attendance, most of them college students, but movement leaders and veterans spoke of them with outright contempt. One right-wing pollster called them "Bushlickers."

This year's CPAC, in fact, was more encouraging for liberals than conservatives. Bush's right-wing base is demanding more concessions than he's made so far, but those concessions are likely to erode whatever moderate support the president has. At one of the most fervently Republican gatherings in the country, it wasn't hard to find people who were planning to vote for third-party candidates from the Constitution or Libertarian parties, and a few even confided in whispers that they might vote for Joe Lieberman or John Edwards if given a chance. The mood was like that of liberals in 2000 who saw Al Gore as nothing more than a lesser evil and yearned to send a futile message through Ralph Nader. While the grass-roots left is more motivated and disciplined than it's ever been, the grass-roots right has turned sullen and uncompromising.

"A lot of people here don't care if Bush wins or not," said Rick Shaftan, a right-wing political consultant and pollster based in New Jersey.

That's good news for Democrats, because few people care more about conservative politics than CPAC attendees. Organized by the American Conservative Union, CPAC is a three-day conference that brings together the leaders of the American right with their most passionate foot soldiers. This year, around 4,000 people gathered at a Marriott in Crystal City, Va., outside of Washington, to hear speakers including Vice President Dick Cheney, neo-McCarthyite Ann Coulter, veteran anti-feminist Phyllis Schlafly, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Iran-Contra veteran Oliver North.

Coulter offered a salutary reminder of how the right really feels about "political hate speech," telling a cheering crowd of hundreds that the Democrats' key constituency consists of "breathtakingly stupid women." She declared, "You can never be too scandalous in talking about liberals. These people are animals; they want to destroy the country and they support the Taliban and al-Qaida the way they supported Stalin in McCarthy's day." Oliver North, the Iran-Contra conspirator, was equally magnanimous, making a joke about journalists killed covering Iraq. "Seventeen war correspondents were killed," he said. "That's unusual. Usually war correspondents are just injured and become casualties when they fall off their egos and land on their IQs." Meanwhile, a company called Star Spangled Ice Cream, a right-wing answer to Ben and Jerry's, handed out samples of "I Hate the French Vanilla" and vendors sold "Bring Back the Blacklist" mugs and "Dean People Suck" buttons.

Yet all the fervent vituperation couldn't hide the widespread feeling of disillusionment. At last year's CPAC, worship for the president was almost cultlike -- people festooned themselves with T-shirts and buttons bearing his face and bought up George Bush mouse pads, mugs and handbags. The same merchandise was for sale this year, but it wasn't moving as swiftly. By Saturday, Bush baseball caps had been marked down from $15 to $3.

"There's concern over what Bush is doing, no question," said Donald Devine, vice chairman of the American Conservative Union and former director of the Office of Personnel Management in the Reagan administration. "He's increased domestic spending more than any recent president. I don't think it's turned into voting against Bush. It may show up in terms of turnout. In the past, that's hurt Republicans."

Indeed, that's why Shaftan, a Jewish Manhattan native wearing a Confederate flag tie under his gray suit, said he wouldn't bet on Bush in the coming election. "If I still gambled, I would not say he's the favorite," he said.

A recent Newsweek poll says the same thing, with 52 percent of voters wanting to see Bush defeated in the 2004 election. Even more significantly, the poll shows fewer people passionately support Bush than passionately oppose him -- while 37 percent of respondents said they strongly want to see Bush reelected, 47 percent strongly do not.

"Some people are upset that Bush himself didn't come," said Foster Lowe, Republican co-chairman of Little Ferry, N.J. Lowe and Shaftan were standing with a group of New Jersey Republicans, all of them griping about the president. "We're the base, and there's an undercurrent of unhappiness," Lowe said. "Last year, everyone was super-excited."

Shaftan looked at Lowe and said, "Where's your 'W' sticker?" "I don't know," Lowe shrugged, adding that he has one on his car. "Everyone here should be having five Bush stickers on," said Shaftan. "In '84, it was a Reagan lovefest. People had 12 stickers." Now, he said, "I don't sense any great deal of enthusiasm." Republican leaders, he said, "are all fat and lazy and thinking they can't lose. These guys are just very arrogant. They think, 'What are they going to do, vote for Kerry?'"

"Don't tell me I have nowhere else to go," said Steven Lonegan, the Republican mayor of Bogota, N.J., speaking of feeling insulted by an administration that takes conservatives for granted.

[cake_crumb]

Libertarian soundbytes will get us another Clintonoid. How quickly we forget the USS Cole, WTCI, Khobar Towers, Somalia, Kosovo, OKC, Waco and Ruby Ridge...

[Howlin]

Exactly.

[dirtboy]

Libertarian soundbytes will get us another Clintonoid.

Not enforcing our border laws makes us less secure.

How quickly we forget the USS Cole, WTCI, Khobar Towers, Somalia, Kosovo, OKC, Waco and Ruby Ridge...

What kind of event mix is that supposed to represent? Ruby Ridge was happend on Bush the Elder's watch - and Bush also got us into Somalia.

[Admin Moderator]

Please include original titles.
Thanks.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Don't you just love these guys? But you can bet the liberal Demoncraps love them even more.

[WOSG]

It's a pity that the Bush administration NEEDLESSLY throws away conservative support through BAD POLICY positions.

Supporting an illegal immigration proposal while not adequately and forthrightly supporting the CLEAR Act or document verification is one example of political blundering.

Not as bad as his tax-hiking father, but close.
The stage was set with various needless panders - the farm bill, the drug bill (a pinata), increased spending... all with no explanation nor excuse from the White House.

Quite frankly, since they lost Ari Fleischer, the White House has had a tin ear and a tin horn.

The Bush administration should be *actively* promoting Conservative positions and values, not throwing a few bones and then expecting full scale loyalty no questions asked. A good example is the tax cut. They should be selling that idea more forthrightly. They should be *actively* defending the administration from the lies of the Democrats - on Iraq, on war on terror, on NCLB act, etc.

It's scary how the Bush 2004 playbook is looking like 1992 - "move to the middle and pretend all is well" ... DOHH! That disappoints your supporters and makes you seem 'out of touch'.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

OK...so let me get this straight. "Conservatives are outraged at Bush" and not at the prospect of a President Kerry or name-your-favorite Dem????????? *sigh*

[Wphile]

Not too mention the dessimation of the intelligence community, hence 9/11 and the miscue on Iraq's WMD. If the Dems control the executive branch, the funding of the CIA will be cut again and we will definitely be worse off than we are now.

[HalfIrish]

Ruby Ridge was happend on Bush the Elder's watch - and Bush also got us into Somalia.

Give the poster a break. It's very easy to confuse Poppy Bush and Clinton. They're a couple of China-loving, constitution shredding sellouts, one of whom was just a slicker accomplishing it. And that one wasn't Willie.

[roses of sharon]

Their logic and melo-dramatics sound like the Dems.

Victimhood, unhappiness and the "I will not be ignored" syndrome rules the day.

Sticking together when things get rough is hard and not much fun.

Not as much fun as talking to the media, and getting attention.

[meenie]

Bush had a world of support after 9/11 that he has frittered away. The coterie that caused the downfall of Bush 41 have worked overtime to do the same with GW. To think that he needed to spend like mad to take issues away from the Democrats is ridiculous. His biggest problem is he has had no discipline in his cabinet. Rumsfeld alternates between Defense and State.

They all have a press conference and contradict one another as well as the President. Intelligence is blamed but nobody is held responsible for that failure. When a policy of defensive deterrence is abandoned and the policy of preventive attack is used with flawed intelligence the results are a disaster. I hope Bush gets his act together for the other side is not capable of promoting any confidence in being able to handle the Presideny.

[Reagan Man]

CPAC 2004 is an effort of the American Conservative Union (ACU). Both are supported and promoted by FreeRepublic. FreeRepublic is the primier conservative website on the internet. Conservatives are also the backbone of the GOP. On the issue of immigration, Michelle Malkin is correct. In fact, a majority of Americans oppose amnesty and open borders.

No one supports the President's reelection more then I do, but that doesn't mean conservative Republicans agree with the President on every issue.

Btw, this article was from the liberal website, Salon. Not very friendly to the reelection of Bush-Cheney.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Their logic and melo-dramatics sound like the Dems.

Yep.......so much so that I wouldn't be surprised to find some moles in these groups. After all, many are working against the re-election of Bush - translation - for the election of a Democrat.

[ex-snook]

"Don't tell me I have nowhere else to go," said Steven Lonegan, the Republican mayor of Bogota, N.J., speaking of feeling insulted by an administration that takes conservatives for granted.

Way to go. If conservatives don't vote for the person closest to their views, you are invisible to politicians. You will keep getting someone more liberal.

Losing isn't everything, it may be the only thing to make a difference.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

IF WE CAN'T HAVE EVERYTHING, WE DON'T WANT NOTHIN'!!!!!!

[OPS4]

The sickness spreads to all of those who do not get thier way. The Me generation,continues its endless pursuit of the perfect political system.

Remember, the grass is not greener on the other side of the hill, your either with us or against us. GW for President,4 more years, and the liberal machine and the whiners will taste defeat.

Ops4 God Bless America!

[kaktuskid]

Remember this...

WE ARE AT WAR!!!...get your heads out of your arses! Kiss your country goodbye if the Frog or the Cherub get in. Remember the president has the executive order which overrules Congress, which has shown no guts in overriding pervious presidential EOs.

[dropped1]

I actually posed this recently to a similar thread. I believe it applies here as well..

Regarding the current Bush/Repub policy...

The problem isn't so much cutting taxes as it is the spending issues. The theory is that cutting taxes will spur growth and actually result in more tax revenues due to the greater economic output. This may work in the short term. However, the increased spending burdens will eventually fall upon we, the people. He is buying his immediate future on our backs.

What is so disturbing about the Bush administration is that rather than acting in a principled fashion (according to Republican [conservative] principles of limited government)is that he has eschewed those principles in a quest to buy (yes, buy) votes from the seniors and those 'on the fence' in order to gain some kind of majority (see election 2000 debacle). Prescription drug coverage, higher educational spending, over a billion to promote marriage(!), campaign finaice, immigration disaster...all of these done while regarding those more conservative with the thought of "Yeah, but who else are you going to vote for?" - taking his base support for granted.

Some suggestions - take the billion + dollars to promote marriage and move the marine base at 29 Palms closer to Yuma, AZ & have it conduct operations along the border. Cancel the educational spending, as it is the states' job.

For those voters who are truly appalled by this, the endgame is simple - the congress is the default place to exercise your individual power. Let me explain. Vote for Bush & maybe he will be reelected, or vote for someone else more aligned with your principles. If Bush loses, the Congress will likely (at this point) be Republican, and be in the same position it was in in the 90's with Groper-in-Chief, that of opposing Dem policies. Unfortunately, it is in opposing Dem policies that Reps are better, as Reps act more principled when lacking the executive branch. They have fallen into the Dem theory of buying votes by pandering. It is sad, for it indicates a lack of faith in the appeal and viability of their own espoused principles.

So how do we exercise influence on congress? Vote locally. Become more involved. Watch the voting record on spending measures. Act to inform (via freerepublic, email, etc.) others of the bad acts. Donate $ acordingly. Support candidates that actually do not want to spend your tax dollars. Most congressional members know 90+% of them are reelected and their districts are heavily gerrymandered, so we need options (alternate candidates) locally. Not an easy path, to be sure, but the only one that has any hope of saving us and our futures. It is time to stop these politicians from spending our $. I fear for the consequences of failure to do so.