Is Bush a Conservative?

Enter Stage Right ^ | February 9, 2004 | Tom DeWeese

[antisocial]

The great problem affecting Americans these days is a mixture of apathy and anger over the growing realization that nothing they say or do matters. It is a growing sense of hopelessness as government spirals out of control and beyond their reach.

What they see is a White House that (1) wants to loan $1.2 billion to the United Nations to renovate its headquarters in New York, (2) that signed agreements with India to accelerate the export of jobs, (3) that has proposed that Mexicans, here illegally, who take jobs from Americans, be granted a status that will lead to amnesty,

[Cathryn Crawford]

Uh oh!

[Mr. Mojo]

Yee Haa! Is this one of them there flame threads?

[Admin Moderator]

ping.

[antisocial]

Thank you for the ping and for restoring the thread.

[antisocial]

Let the flames begin!

[antisocial]

Don't you like philosophical discussions?

[Mark Felton]

"Is Bush conservative?"

Define "conservative". Most people who are pro-liberty, anti-big government, pro-individualism, pro-Constitution may think of themselves as "conservative". Yet, conservatism is defined as those whop protect the status quo and are resistant to change. For 40 years Republicans have been as guilty as the Dems of supporting pro-socialist programs. They now rank Social Security as their number 1 priority.

The truth is most Freepers who consider themselves conservatives are in actuality classical liberals, or Jeffersonian liberals.

If a proponent of socialist policies (social security, welfare, healthcare, prescription drugs...) makes one a socialist then indeed Bush is a socialist, albeit a bourgoisie socialist (conservative socialist). However both parties are socialist. Bush represents the conservative socialist party (Republicans) and the Democrats are utopian socialists.

There is no true "liberal" party, and the conservative party is merely the one that is most resistant to change, by definition.

Bush IS a conservative. Modern conservatives ARE bourgoisie socialists.

We now need a pro-liberty party to counter the two socialist parties.

[Chief901]

Well, There he goes again!!!!!

Why YES he is.

[Texas_Dawg]

Is antisocial severely mentally retarded?

[Consort]

Is Bush a Conservative fatigue.

[raloxk]

"What they see is a White House that (1) wants to loan $1.2 billion to the United Nations to renovate its headquarters in New York,"

i am pretty sure the average american isnt aware of this and if they were it wouldnt be a big source of anger.

when i read things like this, i immediately tune out because I know that this writer, while sincere, is probably way outside the mainstream.

[Porterville]

I think a better question,is Buchanan and his followers completely nuts, or are they just insane, or just a bunch of paranoid-xenophobic-in_the_closet-cry babies?

[aastro285]

You are absolutely right. President Bush has ignored the wishes of the American People, especially his conservative so-called "base", which he continues to alienate. Illegal aliens has ravaged California down to the bone and they're doing the same(slowly but surely) to the rest of the country. Now he's got an amnesty proposal which will toss this country into a third-world hole. They say that illegal aliens will only take jobs that American citizens don't want. It's not the jobs they don't want but the wages and lack of medical coverage or compensation. In New York, illegal aliens are doing every type of job under the sun: delivery boys, construction, roofing, security, truck driving, cooks, waiters/waitresses, handymen/carpenters, mechanics, retail, etc,etc,etc. These are jobs that were formerly performed by unionized and well compensated American citizens. The good people who once performed these functions have now been forced to take on lower paying jobs
in the service sector, displacing teenagers and low-skilled workers. Since the aliens who displaced these workers in the first place don't pay any taxes, then the tax burden will rise for those who are working and living here legally. In addition to that, the social services provided to illegal aliens means fewer services allocated to those who are actually paying for it. The children of native New Yorkers will not receive the quality education they're legally entitled to since illegal aliens have over crowded our schools. The health care system is shot since illegal aliens get free emergency room and maternity care, again payed for in full by American citizens. In LA, and you'll never read this in a "mainstream" news publication, a police official from that city indicated that 95% of the city's outstanding warrants are for illegal aliens who managed to commit at least one other crime since coming to this country legally.

Now why haven't the politicians been witnessing all of this? Well, number one, they know it's the truth and they are fully aware of what illegal immigration has done(and is doing) to this country. They're not blind or stupid. Then why are they letting this happen? Well, only the naive would believe that it's for the Hispanic vote since a majority of Hispanics, polls have shown, are against amnesty just like everyone else. There are other more sinister reasons. One, some of them are hard-leftists that would prefer to turn this country into a third-world socialist/globalist state. Others are either tricked or intimidated by their fellow lawmakers into voting for trade/immigration policies that would hurt this country for the purpose of fulfilling some nefarious agenda. Still another group may have good intentions but are coerced, threatened, or even blackmailed into following this particular agenda. And then there's a forth group(which I commend) that refuses to go along with this nonsense and continues to resist this subversive movement no matter how much the establishment to pressures them. This is a nonpartisan issue. Both democrats and republicans are on both sides of it. We could secure our borders if we wanted to. Mexico secures it's borders. China has the largest border in the world and it's fully secured(both ways). Western Europeans secure their borders from the Eastern Europeans. The reason ours isn't secured is because there are people in high levels or our own government who are making decisions with the full intent of opening the borders, undermining the capacity of the Border Patrol, INS, and the coast guard in hopes of bringing this country in full complience(whether we like it or not) with the FTAA mandates on open "migration". Our nation has been targeted by the likes of this for many generations and the movement currently shows no signs of slowing down unless we sponsor some state mandated measures to curb this foreseen destruction. Like California's Proposition 187 which would hopefully appear on the ballot on Election day, 2004. If we don't act, the politicians (on both sides of the aisle) will surely grant blanket amnesty. Unless we speak loudly with more propositions like California's 187, they will never listen to us. Because they're just not afraid of us. At election time they try to distract us from his ongoing problem by blasting loudly about important but less profound issues such as taxes, gay weddings, or somebody's military service. But if we allow ourselves to become distracted at election time and then victimized by illegal aliens the rest of the time, then we deserve the impending doom that's surely to come. Most importantly, don't allow yourselves to be called "racist" or "xenophobic". It's only a mechanism of control. They will do whatever they can to silence you. They are desperate. The leftists-socialists hate free speech and the will of the people since they're the only things that can bring them down.

[The_Reader_David]

There are lots of kinds of conservatives, depending on what they want to conserve.

Some conservatives want to conserve the legacy of the 1950's (always forgetting that the 50's produced the 60's), others want to conserve all of the history of Western civilization up to but not including the 'Enlightenment', most thoughtful American conservatives
want to conserve all of the history of Western civilization up to and including the Scottish and English 'Enlightenments' but not the Continental 'Englightenment'.

Some just want to conserve the status quo (and thing good government is just a matter of careful management). I suspect GWB is one of this kind.

[Tamzee]

Why not do something actually PRODUCTIVE with all that angst... we'll keep voting in the "rightward most viable candidate" (thank you, W. Buckley) and those on the right who don't think they are rightward ENOUGH can work to move the electorate further our way.

One place to start is HERE... actually educate American voters WHY a prescription plan or more education spending is bad for America. It's more productive than screaming at the President who gives it to the public because a majority want this spending and think it is the government's job.

******

Adopt a liberal newsgroup

http://jednet207.tripod.com/PoliticalNewsGroups-PC.html

[Mark Felton]

It's time to stop conserving and start liberating.

[Owen]

"I support the rightmost candidate who is viable." WF Buckley

[Gal.5:1]

There is an itty bitty outside possible tiny chance that maybe perhaps Bush is 'third way' in his political philosophy, (like Clinton) but in his own particular way.

And of course by that I do not mean "third party".

[Map Kernow]

"I support the rightmost candidate who is viable." WF Buckley

"I am not WF Buckley. I am simply a free American citizen. No one can browbeat me into voting for a man who has betrayed conservative principles and conservative voters, and still expects to receive my vote as an entitlement, as 'the rightmost [sic] candidate that is viable [double sic].' "

---Map Kernow