[softengine]

Sounds sound to me.

[SuziQ]

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.

I believe he's trying to get that 15-20% independent vote in the middle. If he can get them and by extension have them vote for the Repubs. for Congress that will be a great feat!!

[Tamzee]

I think Hillary's Lovely Legs stated it quite beautifully...

[Tamzee]

PhiKapMom, this would be a terrific column for the Bush-Cheney 04 ping list...

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.

The folks on your list are the ones "smart enough to figure out what is going on" ;-)

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Great post. I like this reasoned approach to pointing out disagreement, but seeing beyond today to imagine the big picture.

It can hardly be argued that no one..NO ONE..is going to change the mindset of this nation with one wave of the hand in one presidential term.

[Ol' Sparky]

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.

This is what is happening with Bush and the Republicans in charge:

However, Cato's fiscal analyst Veronique de Rugy notes: "The current president easily eclipses his father on federal spending growth." De Rugy and Cato researcher Tad DeHaven calculate that in real, or inflation-adjusted terms, non-defense discretionary outlays will rise about 20.8 percent in George W. Bush's first three years in office (through FY2004). That growth far exceeds the 11.6 percent growth in the first three years of former President Bush's administration. Indeed, the current president's three-year real increase exceeds Jimmy Carter's term (13.8 percent), Ronald Reagan's first term (-13.5 percent), Reagan's second term (-3.2 percent), Bill Clinton's first term (-0.7 percent), and Clinton's second term (8.2 percent). See table for details.

Gridlock sounds pretty good until a real conservative can be elected in 2008.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

Bump for a thought

[olliemb]

Great post--

[King Prout]

maybe I'm tired and low on coffee, but this article does not read coherently.

[Sloth]

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).

Complete and utter fantasy. Only a liar or a fool describes "fixing excessive government spending" as easy. We HAVE a Republican majority in the Congress -- and control of the White House -- and they are spending like mad.

[ezo4]

Ill know how to vote in september.

[Cacique]

btt

[Askel5]

=== but they change the image of Republicans and set the stage for a long-term Republican takeover.


Unfortunately, this "image" change is not exactly skin deep but rather has and only will continue to exact pounds of flesh.

Intellectuals who "Maybe" think Bait & Switch is the best possible (or least evil) of all tacks to take "Maybe" should drop the pretense of selling themselves as "Intellectual" conservatives.

[Libertina]

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,blah blah blah...
It will NEVER shut the left up.

[sauropod]

"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"

Male Bovine Fecal Effluvia!

[My2Cents]

Excellent. So refreshing to find true conservatives that haven't lost their minds. Great comments.

[McGavin999]

He's always counted on us to be smart enough to figure it out, and some of us are. Unfortunately, some around here are definitely NOT. They have refused to look at the bigger picture and are only capable of looking at things through the narrow prisim of their own personal interests, thinking that only THEIR way can succeed.

He's depending on us, and some of us are letting him down.

[MissAmericanPie]

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 (he is saying this with a straight face, incredible).

Excessive government spending can be weaned down over time with a Republican majority in Congress (and it will in due time) (ROFLOL). Illegal immigration can be solved with technology, a slight bump in spending, and a determined Republican president (oh yeah, this has proven to be a snap, the intensity of devotion on the part of Bush and the congress to solve these issues has been soooooo impressive, NOT). Neither, however, can be fixed unless steps are taken to regain a firm control of Congress and overall politics (what a crock).

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 (he forgets to mention it increases the number of demonrat voters by a nuclear instant to 12 million strong), 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 (unfortunately for him we are smart enough to figgure out exactly 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.

[Antoninus]

I still have a faint hope that this is Bush's long-term plan.... However, the half-a-trillion dollar Medicare boondoggle, more money for the NEA (of all things!), and the overall lack of any kind of restraint on spending has moved me from the "ardent" supporter camp to the "lukewarm."

[Luis Gonzalez]

**PING**

[x]

Nice spin, but but it doesn't fly. At least not as an active policy. The two parties tend to rotate in office. If you don't use power when you have it, you lose your turn.

The idea that playing possum will prevent the election of a Democrat -- or of a more radical or liberal Democrat -- is a shaky one. It's one that the President's father tried, and it didn't work for him. The Democrat will be elected if the Republican looks weak or ineffective or dangerous, and it's not clear how much control the Republicans have over what kind of Democrat will be nominated.

As a passive policy -- an acceptance of the status quo -- the author's policy does make sense, but not if you really aspire to get things done or change things. And if all a politician wants is to serve out his time with minimal fuss and bother, is he being a good leader? If you believe that there are things seriously wrong with the way the government operates, doesn't it make sense to want to do something about them when you have the chance?

Green's policy is Nixonism, and Nixonism doesn't work. It doesn't mobilize conservative energies. Rather it lets them dry up, atrophy or decay. The President doesn't have to commit himself to anything as drastic or silly as dismantling the federal government, but he does have to give a clear direction in conservative terms, or the ideas that Ronald Reagan brought into the center of American political life will be pushed back to the periphery.