Conservatives Need to Get Real

While President Bush may not be a conservative’s perfect president, the alternative should shake any discontents to active support of the President.

As a conservative, I agree with most of the criticism that has been leveled at President Bush amongst Republicans and conservatives. While I support the President’s foreign and defense policies, I think that the Administration has tried to do the impossible—preempt the Left on their own issues. Republicans were not put on this earth to increase the size of government, create massive new programs like Medicare, spend billions of dollars on AIDS in Africa, fund the UN renovation, expand the Federal role in education or pursue a reckless policy of granting amnesty to illegal foreigners working in the US. None of these initiatives by the President will, in the end, take votes from the Democratic core base. Democrats are much better and far more willing to outspend any Republican program that expands the Welfare State. The strong suit of Republicans is limited government, lower taxes, individual responsibility and strong national defense. Karl Rove may be right that some of the President’s big government initiatives may neutralize some independents. In any case, conservatives could have hoped for much more in a Washington where Republicans control both the White House and Congress.

Having said all that, I intend to do whatever I can to reelect President Bush. The reason is simple. The alternative is unthinkable. A tax increase by rolling back the President’s much needed tax relief will not go to reduce the deficit but to fund massive new social programs, especially some form of universal national health care system. The stimulus of tax relief will be gone and the deadweight of new taxes and government program will lead to a much larger deficit. Moreover, the hue and cry over the deficit is only logical if the deficit grows as a percentage of GDP over a period of years. Economic recovery can shrink the deficit in a relatively short time -- provided there is no new spending. A Democrat will give us the worst of both worlds -- higher taxes and higher spending.

A Democratic economic policy is also lethal to the American middle class and small business. The repeal of most taxes to the “wealthy” proposed by the Democrats are really to two-income families that are just getting by and are clearly the backbone of the middle-class and small business owners who pay income tax; their business is not a corporation but a family business that is a sole proprietorship. An increase in dividend taxation or capital gains will put the financial markets in a tailspin and further retard the growth of new or expanded business activity.

Universal health care has an interesting twist that few seem to be discussing. If people are concerned about possible invasions of privacy because of the Patriot Act, imagine the access to private information available to Big Brother when he gets his hands on your medical records. Once the government is subsidizing our health, how long will it take before certain health lifestyles or diets become a matter of government concern over its citizens? Should we expect a universal health care system to deliver the same value as our compulsory educational system? In fact, the Democrats are likely to create an even greater rift between the Haves and Have-Nots in healthcare by allowing only the wealthiest Americans to pay for private services. Besides this, universal health will either bankrupt the economy since the demand for healthcare is virtually without limit or it will require the government to ration healthcare. Do we really want the delivery of healthcare to become a matter of political bargaining? Imagine the hypocrisy of those who are adamant that the relationship between a doctor and patient is sacrosanct when it comes to abortion, but would make almost all medical procedures a matter of public policy mandates in the future. Imagine your worst nightmare of an HMO and then increase that exponentially and you begin to get the real meaning of Universal Health Care. As for the eventual bill for this service, look to the past at all other federal entitlement programs. To make matters worse, no Democrat is going to support Medical Practice Tort Reform which is contributing to the skyrocketed growth of healthcare costs.

How will Democrats deal with other issues of free market choice for individuals? No Democrat supports any level of privatization of Social Security for retirement. There is no support for school vouchers or alternatives to the monopoly of the public school system. Finally there is no support for private Health Savings Accounts among the Democrats. While Republicans will at least look for market-based solutions to public policy issues, the unions and bureaucratic constituencies of the Democrats virtually insures no such innovation.

On the matter of illegal immigration, the Democrats are more likely to pass a liberal new amnesty program than any GOP administration. The reason is that the Hispanic community seems to be “in play” and this is one constituency the Democrats really need to lock up in order to strengthen their position on the West Coast and in the Southwest.

One can only imagine the kind of social activist judges and Supreme Court justices that would be appointed by the Democratic nominee. The Federal Judiciary will begin to resemble the lunacy of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. Can any responsible citizen sit home and allow the judiciary to lunge to the Left? This alone should energize conservatives. The dismantling of all religious tradition or symbolism in public life is likely to continue with a Democratic President and a liberal judiciary.

The final issue is one of national security. Certainly no one can believe that a Democratic administration will strengthen our intelligence and defense capabilities. It was under Democratic administrations that the CIA and other intelligence agencies became decimated and hand-tied. The Democrats have almost unanimously voted against nearly all major new weapons systems. At a time when we are in fact living in a Third World War, we can not go from a Churchill to a Chamberlain. It is disingenuous for the Democrats to glob onto intelligence deficiencies when they are largely the culprit for lack of human intelligence or material resources in the important area of espionage. In fighting a terrorist enemy, preemption is the natural policy and that requires intelligence first and foremost.

While President Bush may not be a conservative’s perfect president, the alternative should shake any discontents to active support of the President. Moreover, in the area of determining the security threat to the West and taking action, the President may go down as one of our greatest leaders. For the sake of the hope of more prudent domestic policy, judicial restraint and national security, there is really no choice. As for much of the domestic agenda, can we afford to sacrifice the good for the perfect?

Scott Shore is a political commentator and management consultant in Providence, Rhode Island.

Yep, and the other half like to be begged to vote.

LOL!

Actually, I read a study of the fringe phenomenon, which indicated that the extremes of either side just about cancelled each other out - that is, as same percentage of "pure conservatives" voted for Perot or Buchanan as the percentage of "pure liberals" who voted for Nader or whoever their pure candidate was. So they cancel each other out.

But in the internet age (because even 4-8 years later, we are more internet-age than before), the crucial thing is to avoid setting off a stampede of fragile folks who hear the bellowings of the "true conservatives" and panic.

This is what the Moby Dems were trying to provoke with their careful seeding of conservative sites and radio with supposedly pure conservative opinions that ended up telling people to vote for Kerry.

I am in neither camp; I haven't decided what I'm going to do. I couldn't care less what label anyone puts on himself. I couldn't care less how you or anyone else defines conservative. I have one litmus test; is the Federal Government growing or is it shrinking. Under Mr. Bush's watch, it is growing at an accelerating pace. This is unacceptable to me. If I grit my teeth and vote for him, the only reason would be on the grounds that he is better Commander&Chief than the alternative. Then at least we may live to try and elect a limited government President another day.

I will vote for GWB. I owe it to me and my family.

The elections are nine months away.

Plenty of time to see what this Congress and this president do. And for conservatives, I'd say that much can be forgiven. But probably not thumbing their noses at us again. Not if they actually do want our votes.

Conservatives need something conservative to vote for. You know, smaller government, less spending. The Reagan and Gingrich agenda which drew so many of us toward the party.

Personally, I don't get the urgency of all these threads on the topic. Are we somehow required to vote now? Someone moved the elections up?

"Decide. Decide! Decide right now!"

What's the hurry?

It's all a little over the top.

Most of these discussions are premature. The Dims are having primaries and voting. Not us.

You are right, of course. And, it is the democratic party's spotlight right now. But, I worry that perception becomes reality when so many venues are bashing this administration. So, I am a lone voice out there trying to point out the merits of this administration.

I gotta commend you....while not a GWB fan, I know you remain open minded - and you are not so blinded by "principle" that you are unable to evaluate matters as they play out.

All the best,

Lando

Hey, the fiscal and social conservatives have got the GOP's attention now. It's going to be months before we know which direction(s) they're going to move.

A lot of conservatives can be pretty easily won back to the party stable.

But you can't take them for granted. Not if you want their votes in a close election.

OTOH, if the economy really booms, Bush/Rove/GOP will discard the conservatives without a second thought.

These discussions will start to be more relevant around summer maybe.

Thanks for the exchange. FRegards.

Not at all?? Read your own words.

No bile. Just fact.

Your conservative 'principles' are phony.

Let's have a serious discussion.

I'm a registered Independent but I consider myself to be conservative idealogically. I am also a Christian and could most definately be accused of being "fringe". I also voted for Bush in 2000 because he advertised himself to conservative Christian voters.

Most of the posts on this thread from both sides is hyperbole but I do have my suspicions that there are many Republicans and(Karl Rove? is the one I hear most about) that would like to dump the conservative Christian voters into the ocean and watch them drown.

One of the key reasons I have considered for voting for Bush again is the military. I was in the Army (I got out in `95) during the Clinton years and it was Horrible. I would hate to think of what it would be like to be one of those soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan to hear the announcement that Kerry won the election.

Now here is my question. If they don't want my vote why should I give it to them? I guess what I want is someone to explain why the Bush administration is wanting to dump conservative Christian voters. Anyone care to explain?

But probably not thumbing their noses at us again. Not if they actually do want our votes

Case in point, Columbine. It's all about 'ME' with these guys.

The President is thumbing his nose at 'US'......he doesn't want 'OUR' votes.

Not about the country. About THEM.

Yes, you are right that it is good to keep putting our views forward when the opportunity presents itself.

Common sense is an antidote to the Bush bashers of whatever persuasion.

And really, what does it matter if they are Mobys or "oh-so-pure conservatives"? The result is the same.

I do have my suspicions that there are many Republicans and(Karl Rove? is the one I hear most about) that would like to dump the conservative Christian voters into the ocean and watch them drown.

You're willing to withhold your vote because of a suspicion that someone - you're not sure who - might have said he wants you to fall in the ocean and drown. Oh dear.

I guess what I want is someone to explain why the Bush administration is wanting to dump conservative Christian voters.

As a conservative Christian, I would like to know what makes you feel like the Bush administration wants to 'dump' you?

Most of the posts on this thread from both sides is hyperbole but I do have my suspicions that there are many Republicans and(Karl Rove? is the one I hear most about) that would like to dump the conservative Christian voters into the ocean and watch them drown.

I will predict to you that this is the most religious and socially conservative president that you will see elected in your lifetime.

You are among others on this forum who supports voting or not voting on 'principle' based on what state you live in.......i.e. you can vote against Bush if you live in a red state and make a 'statement' because he's going to win the state anyway.

Your textual difficulties are not my fault.

I said no such thing. I never said I was going to vote against Bush.

You just live in some Bushorama fantasy world, don't you? Any piece of text takes on almost Rorschachian attributes where you just free-associate whatever comes into your mind.

I'll reply to you because you seem interested in a discussion and not name calling or accusations.

Granted the President himself seems to be the most Christian one we've had in a long time and probably for a long time to come. It's just that I'm always hearing that many of the key folks in Republican circles can't wait for the day they can do without our vote.

So say the following scenerio unfolds. Republicans get their 60 seat Senate and then proceed to fall all over themselves to be moderate, mainstream, in the middle. I guess I'm really more concerned about getting bit by the dog that I'm feeding.

Now it's "Just you wait til we get 60 seats in the Senate!"

Not so. This Bush supporter believes that he has made a huge mistake.

No excuses anymore. We throw EVERY Republican letter away now. We don't get on the phone or go to events anymore.

Bush will get the vote because the alternative is a gang of socialists and deviants, but Bush will go down in history as a problem spender unless he changes fast.

The rumors you read on this forum are most likely planted by the Democrat Underground.

President Bush has done nothing to betray his Christian conservative base.

He has fought abortion, signed the PBA ban, stood up for the sanctity of marriage, morality, personal responsibility, abstinence programs, freedom of religion for Christians who have been losing it for the past 20 years.

He has done more for the cause of Christ in America than any (realistic) Christian could possibly have hoped for when he was elected 3 years ago.

And he has 5 more years to go.

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.