GOP slams Bush policies at retreat

The Washington Times ^ | 2/6/04 | By Ralph Z. Hallow and James G. Lakely

[ovrtaxt]

Growing frustration over President Bush's immigration plan and lack of fiscal discipline came to a head behind closed doors at last weekend's Republican retreat in Philadelphia.

House lawmakers, stunned by the intensity of their constituents' displeasure at some of Mr. Bush's key domestic policies, gave his political strategist Karl Rove an earful behind closed doors.

[B4Ranch]

"this is the first real attempt to address this since 1965."

Here's where you messed up. This is an attempt to address how to allow 20 million illegal aliens to come into America without penalty. This is an attempt at ignoring his duties and oath of office while pushing Agenda 21, without ever mentioning the program.

Now you may, if you wish, continue to deny that there is a Program named Agenda 21.

[gatorbait]

No, I don't care. okay? Wait, Jose' , por favor, get me more coffee..

[gatorbait]

This is an attempt at ignoring his duties and oath of office while pushing Agenda 21, without ever mentioning the program.

Wait, I care enough to have you tell me WHO is pushing this? President Bush? Teddy Kennedy? King Kong? The guy panhandling on Decatur Street? Who?

[applemac_g4]

"There are plenty of posters here who disagree with President Bush on one or more issues and are able to voice those objections with reason. Then there are the posters who call him a socialist, threaten to go third party or vote for Kerry, and attack all who disagree with them. That is the type of large-scale vituperative disagreement I am talking about."

-----

So it's ok to disagree with Bush as long as you don't actually do anything about it. Most curious.

[NittanyLion]

On that note, I'm outta here for the day. Have a good one.

[B4Ranch]

President Bush & Teddy Kennedy, both sides of the House working together have been quite effective at it over the years.

[Ches]

"A quantum leap to the left happened in 1992. November to be exact."

LOL! Are you saying the Clinton administration was leftist? Who'd have thunk it! I agree it was a leap to the left. I don't know where the statistics come from that it was the conservatives who abandoned the party but that seems to be a popular notion.

Anecdotally, based upon people I know or have had conversations with, it looks to me like a lot of blue collar and Joe 6 Pack types went for Perot. Many of these people had voted for Reagan and had been the famous "Reagan Democrats." I admit there are disillusioned or disgruntled true believing conservatives but I find them few and far between. I do, however, find amongst the nonpolitico centrists, a lot of head scratching about what this administration is doing. Since '92 I guess it's been more of a snowball rolling downhill, gaining size, speed and momentum to the left with the aid of the Washington establishment Republicans under Clinton and their endorsement under Bush.

Personally, I have a hard time not viewing this as pandering at best or blatant buying of votes. Sad to say, the welfare state is winning.

[George W. Bush]

We have to stand on our principles AND HELP THE REPUBLICAN TEAM WIN. If we dont do that, our "principles" will lose. Socialism will win.

Which socialism would that be exactly?

I must be going color-blind. I can't seem to tell Red from Blue these days.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

"Wait, I care enough to have you tell me WHO is pushing this? President Bush? Teddy Kennedy? King Kong? The guy panhandling on Decatur Street? Who?"

I think that is a legit question. Upon considering my options for the upcoming election I had to really consider if I thought President Bush was the kind of guy who would "hood wink " us.

As for me I say no, he isn't perfect but he isn't the devil either. I know in my heart he is not a liberal or an anti-American stooge.

SO then there must be some reason for these shifts to the left, as I see them.

IMO, it is a combination of things. Top on my list is bad advice from Karl Rove, and a soft Congress and House .

Of course that is not all it is, but it is a start in my book.

[nopardons]

It is NOT the displeasure, that I rail against. It is NOT that some ( actually ALL of us!) disagree with with some things that the president has said or done( though some here complain about EVERYTHING he has said and done!), that makes one a fringer. It is that some advocate voting for some fringe party candidate/writing in someone who has repeated said that he doesn't want that done.

You tell me............what else should someone be called, who strenuously and stridently calls for everyone to vote for the Constitution Party's or the Libertarian Party's candidate, if not a fringer ?

[iconoclast]

Karl Rove is a political whore.

If Bush WINS, Rove is a successful whore. If he loses he is a failed whore.

Does he remind you of any FReepers?

[Ches]

The Chicken Ranch or a streetwalker, some choice.

[nopardons]

That works on some people ( though they more often than not relapse, once out of earshot to you ! ), but not on many. I know people, unfortunately, who will listen intently and agree with anyone who has their ear. It's just a matter of who they've been listening to last.

And once we've " converted "/educated a few, what then? There is no HYDE PARK CORNER in America. What are we to do, wander American streets playing at the Ancient Mariner ? Kidnap known Liberals, tie them up, and force them to listen to Rush and Sean and Brit and us ? I'm all for reprogramming centers a la Mao, but that's illegal and President Bush is no Reagan, when it comes to public speaking; unfortunately.

[nightdriver]

"Bush just made an immigration proposal it is completely within their power to vote it down."

Exactly!!

The president can't spend a dime (well, maybe he can of some special funds) that congress refuses to him. Our exhalted representatives are as much or more to blame than the president is.

[WOSG]

Nick, the article was brilliant - so brilliant, it cost me a 4 hour careen through blog-space, where I wasted 4 hours learning much but doing little to convince others of my views. As if to prove the point, it's a virtual reality, at best.

"We had our very own on-line echo chamber long before anyone ever heard of Howard Dean. ... Folks, let's not fall into the Deaniac Internet Echo-Chamber trap. We are not the American electorate. We are highly vocal ring-wing nuts... the exact counterpoint to Dean's highly vocal left-wing nuts."

I agree with that. We need the 'homebase' of getting our own consensus and world-view shaped up and the comfort of knowing we are not alone, but moreso we need the friction of meeting the real world and not spinning our own realities too hard. I often wish we had more liberals around to keep some of the debate a bit more honest, etc.

To me, that means I need to go out and meet the neighborhood today in my race for my office (check my homepage).

"One of the things that many people have speculated about is whether the Deaniacs will accept reality, or whether they will go off in a snit... and come November, either write in Howard, or vote for Ralph Nader, or stay home altogether. People wonder about that because the Deaniacs are widely perceived to be a bunch of immature moonbeamers."

It is not recognized that Dean HAS WON in a way: His message won. The same way the Apple "Mac" meme eventually "won" when Windows95 finally caught up to it. Kerry and others caught Dean's message and followed his lead. His candidacy died, but his message of an AGRESSIVELY ANTI-BUSH MESSAGE is still around, and is influencing the debate. This was not the case in June, when it was questionable whether the Democrats would go after Bush on a 'popular war'.

[ovrtaxt]

What are we to do, wander American streets playing at the Ancient Mariner ? Kidnap known Liberals, tie them up, and force them to listen to Rush and Sean and Brit and us ? I'm all for reprogramming centers a la Mao, but that's illegal

Hehe! Well, but the sitcom watchers and otherwise distracted individuals can be roped in, if they can be convinced to care.

Take, for instance, the famous 'political quiz' that the LP pushes. The vast majority find themselves in the libertarian quadrant, they just don't know it. Likewise, I have had several people in my car with AM on, and they find themselves agreeing with Rush, even Savage. They just don't know any better. Our educational efforts frankly suck.

[Nick Danger]

sad to see

While it may not be apparent to everyone, it is certainly apparent to me where that spear is coming from.

For God's sake, Kristinn, let it go. Almost everyone involved buried the hatchet on that crap years ago. I don't even think about it anymore. I had an opportunity to speak at CPAC; I made sure that you folks were in it. When an opportunity came up to get somebody into a small-group setting with Bush, the first person I offered it to was a member of the DC Chapter. Now you come up and throw some rusty old spear from the War of 1812.

Life is too short for this.

[ovrtaxt]

BTW, I don't vote LP, but I use them by way of example here.

[iconoclast]

fringer

What's a fringer?

On the fringe of what?

A serious answer please.

[Miss Marple]

If by doing something about it, you mean writing letters, withholding funds, or writing letters-to-the editor, fine.

If you mean voting for a third party or a democrat, not so fine. In fact, pfui.

There is a fine line between expressing disagreement and going over to the Rat side. Hopefully, you will be able to discern the difference.