Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Maybe Bush is Right On
Intellectual Conservative ^ | 30 January 2004 | Raymond Green

Posted on 01/31/2004 6:27:08 PM PST by softengine

Much has been said about the Bush administration’s handling of sensitive issues to conservatives like illegal immigration and entitlement spending. The criticism is both broad and intense, coming from traditional allies and longtime foes. Though the criticism coming from opponents is severely hypocritical, it scars no less.

Conservatives are consistent in their disparagement of excessive government spending and amnesty programs for illegal immigrants. This, however, leaves no one to thoroughly explain Bush’s policy strategy because his adversaries stringently attack for the sake of power regardless of policy. Though I don’t personally condone the liberal approach of the current administration’s handling of these specific policies, I do understand the strategy involved.

As conservatives, we must force ourselves to look at the big picture. Our country faces a crippling moral dilemma; the tort system cost our economy an estimated $233 billion in 2003; we desperately need a national energy policy; we need to continue reducing the overwhelming tax burden in our country; our intelligence gathering methods must be vastly overhauled and improved; it is critical that the defense of this country continue to be improved and grow; and we must continue to fight the war on terrorism as we currently are or we will find ourselves in the same war on our soil in coming years. This is a minor explanation of what the macro picture currently looks like.

We can safely assume atheists will continue to embrace – and even encourage – the degradation of morality and religion in this country; trial attorneys will never propose tort reform; environmentalists will not support any realistic energy policy; those dependent on government subsidies will fight any tax cut; and liberal anti-military, anti-intelligence, anti-war, special interests-appeasing politicians will put our country at great risk if left in charge of such issues. These people are Democrats and for this reason alone it is critical that Republicans maintain control of Congress and the White House. Fortunately, this isn’t where supporting the Bush administration ends.

President Bush and company have trademarked setting traps for Democrats. He trapped Democrats into supporting the war by initiating the debate just before elections and trapped Democrats into making the capture of Saddam Hussein an issue. He trapped Democrats into opposing an entitlement to seniors and he, not Howard Dean, forced the Democrats further to the left. Bush has taken Democrats’ issues from them and set the stage for an election based primarily on national security – not a Democrat strong suit.

So we come to Bush’s base supporters. Needless to say, we are not happy – but we must be smart. I pose the following questions to ponder: (1) Will excessive government spending and entitlement programs ever be reformed with Democrats in office and (2) Does politics end when Bush’s term ends? The answer to both is obviously no. The end goal is to place Republicans in Congress strategically to outlast Bush. Bush has been accused by allies of repeating his father’s mistakes. I strongly caution against trying to use a slight majority in Congress to overhaul our country in one term – we’ve seen what that brings before.

Our country faces a number of critical issues we must address in coming years. The easiest to fix is (a) excessive government spending and (b) illegal immigration – if, and only if, Republicans are in office. Excessive government spending can be weaned down over time with a Republican majority in Congress (and it will in due time). Illegal immigration can be solved with technology, a slight bump in spending, and a determined Republican president. Neither, however, can be fixed unless steps are taken to regain a firm control of Congress and overall politics.

Do I agree with amnesty or excessive spending? No; quite the contrary. But I disagree with – and to a great extent, fear – the radical agenda of the left. It will, and has already begun to, destroy this country. It is critical we take control and if a bump to the National Endowment for the Arts silences a few artists, amnesty shuts a few radical Hispanic groups up, and a prescription entitlement makes a few seniors happy, so be it. These policies may not make an overwhelming difference in polls or make many people vote for Bush who wouldn’t have otherwise, but they change the image of Republicans and set the stage for a long-term Republican takeover.

Right or wrong, that is the Bush strategy. Choosing not to vote for him on these specifics simply counts as a vote for his opponents. He may be taking his voter base for granted; however, he may just be assuming we’re smart enough to figure out what is going on. Politics will outlast President Bush; he simply hopes it is politics dominated by Republicans who can eventually take on the issues we are forced to swallow at present.


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: conservatives; election; electionpresident; gwb2004; republican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 481-487 next last
To: softengine
Sounds like crap to me - defense of a failed President. Anyone would have had to take on ASl-Quaeda. IRAQ, perhaps the info was wrong and the act right - WHY ARE WE THERE NOW? The Democracy will not follow, they are tribal, socialists and love the Ruskies and French - case closed. Bush also has a huge deficit, and allows our jobs to be exported (even Clinton only exported a small percentage.) What jobs Bush doesn't ship he wants to give to Guest Workers who work for substandard wages; they do more than mow lawns; he will make their kids legal, mock those who did thing legally; permite the White House (www.whitehouse.gov) to be in English and Spanish - an insult to those who speak American or learned to speak American; has failed to end abortion, can't get his judges appointed and takes crap by allowing the minority Degenerats to be in control etc etc. I am beginning to believe the Democrats - bush is stupid.
21 posted on 01/31/2004 7:09:07 PM PST by Henchman (I Hench, therefore I am!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: softengine
Vote Republican ...we arent as bad as the other guys....
22 posted on 01/31/2004 7:12:55 PM PST by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JZoback
Republicans on some issues only slow down or minimize the damage by Democrats.
23 posted on 01/31/2004 7:13:25 PM PST by hawk1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand
Bush has passed more of the democrats liberal agenda in four years than Clinton did in eight.

If you think the answer to the moral decay in America is a Republican President, explain why the country is in such horrible moral decay and there has been just two Democrats in the White House since 1965.

24 posted on 01/31/2004 7:13:35 PM PST by Afronaut (Press two for English)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: softengine
The author says that not voting for Bush is a vote for one of his opponents. That would bother me if not for the fact that there is nary a difference between Bush and his opponents. While I dread the possibility of a President Edwards or a President Kerry, America literally can't afford another four years of Bush's "compassionate conservatism."
25 posted on 01/31/2004 7:15:21 PM PST by Holden Magroin (Like father, like son.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kitkat; ohioWfan; ilovew; hoosiermama; texasflower; Maigrey; homemom; TruthNtegrity; B-Bear; ...
Since we have all been working against the Bush bashers so hard on this site, I thought this article may provide additional ammunition for us.
26 posted on 01/31/2004 7:16:15 PM PST by Peach (The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hawk1
Republicans on some issues only slow down or minimize the damage by Democrats.

Bush has on some issues has been the greatest democrat Pesident since FDR

27 posted on 01/31/2004 7:18:34 PM PST by JZoback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: softengine

28 posted on 01/31/2004 7:19:58 PM PST by spodefly (This is my tagline. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chicagolady
The Lesser of 2 Evils is Evil Still.

Okay, I'll vote for the lesser evil (though I don't believe he is evil) and you (and all your friends) vote for a 'true conservative'. A year after the election we will both be unhappy. I'll be b*tching and complaining, but I'll be working for the next 8 yrs to gid rid of the Dems. You'll be b*tching and complaining, but you'll do nothing but say how you 'voted your conscience'.

Nothing will change....I'll vote to get rid of the Dems and you'll vote them back in!

29 posted on 01/31/2004 7:20:21 PM PST by Krodg (...when you no-show for a decade, you ain't the base anymore!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
"They are stuck. Some of us, however, never made that devil's bargain and are free to vote our consciences in November."

If you have a conscience you won't vote for a democrat.

30 posted on 01/31/2004 7:23:15 PM PST by DestroytheDemocrats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: softengine
"...(Bush) may be taking his voter base for granted; however, he may just be assuming we’re smart enough to figure out what is going on."

He knows that we are smart enough.

31 posted on 01/31/2004 7:24:00 PM PST by shetlan (He knows that we are smart enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JZoback
I like the way you think!!!
32 posted on 01/31/2004 7:24:03 PM PST by Howlin (If we don't post, will they exist?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: chicagolady
I am not in any way conceding that President Bush is "evil", but assuming that's what you meant - precisely how does voting for, or enabling the election of, the one more evil benefit anyone?
33 posted on 01/31/2004 7:24:29 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz
maybe even the amnesty prog is some terribly cerebral master-stratagem that will bear fruit some time in the future, and that will astonish us all in its intricacy and intelligence.

Yeah, I think that's what I'm waiting for...answers, from the Bush administration, that explain to those of us dwelling in confusion, just what the heck he's doing. I keep telling myself it will all come together, but I find myself fearful that it won't.

34 posted on 01/31/2004 7:24:40 PM PST by dubyagee (The White House spending spree is making me crazy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JZoback
Oh yeah, they'll be beside themselves for about three days until they actually get control of it and start using it towards their ends.

There used to be a time not very long ago at all when Republicans wanted to abolish the Department of Energy.

35 posted on 01/31/2004 7:24:43 PM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: chicagolady
Vote Democrat!

when you're tired of chosing the lesser of two evils.

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Jamais reculez á tyrannie un pouce!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! Never give an inch to tyranny!)

LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

36 posted on 01/31/2004 7:28:47 PM PST by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Afronaut
Bush has passed more of the democrats liberal agenda in four years than Clinton did in eight.

If you think the answer to the moral decay in America is a Republican President, explain why the country is in such horrible moral decay and there has been just two Democrats in the White House since 1965.

Now, along with everything else you people complain about, you're going to try to pin a decline in morality on President Bush? I must be mistaken in my interpretation of your post. I surely hope I am.

37 posted on 01/31/2004 7:28:52 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: softengine
Our country faces a number of critical issues we must address in coming years. The easiest to fix is (a) excessive government spending and (b) illegal immigration – if, and only if, Republicans are in office. Excessive government spending can be weaned down over time with a Republican majority in Congress (and it will in due time). Illegal immigration can be solved with technology, a slight bump in spending, and a determined Republican president. Neither, however, can be fixed unless steps are taken to regain a firm control of Congress and overall politics.


Do I agree with amnesty or excessive spending? No; quite the contrary. But I disagree with – and to a great extent, fear – the radical agenda of the left. It will, and has already begun to, destroy this country.
//////////////////////

Man I sure hope this guy is right. But I'm not sure the guy understands the logic of what's happening. There is an enormous tsnunami of people building behind the current tidal wave of people coming into the country. Much of it would be bootstrapped legally by the current wave--even without counting many more now encouraged to come. Most of the current and future ones will be democrats because they will be largly recepients of government largesse--also being voted in.

Overwhelmingly those given amnesty by Republicans in 1986--voted democrat.

History does not suggest that Bush has all his ducks in a row--except, perhaps, for own administration. The demographics-- if not checked--will go against the pubbies.
38 posted on 01/31/2004 7:31:27 PM PST by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Holden Magroin
"While I dread the possibility of a President Edwards or a President Kerry, America literally can't afford another four years of Bush's "compassionate conservatism."

Then vote for Bush just so Michael Moore and Democrats every where will have to suffer through four more years of Bush. Think of how it will stick in their craw to have Bush as President again. Don't you love the idea of Barbara Streisand being misearable? Don't you love the thought of the liberal elite suffering mental anguish over losing to Bush?

39 posted on 01/31/2004 7:38:44 PM PST by DestroytheDemocrats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
"Overwhelmingly those given amnesty by Republicans in 1986--voted democrat."

And if they all voted for a Republican it would be alright?

40 posted on 01/31/2004 7:39:08 PM PST by Afronaut (Press two for English)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 481-487 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson