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

Skip to comments.

Conservatives Need to Get Real
The Intellectual Conservative ^ | 02 February 2004 | Scott Shore

Posted on 02/11/2004 11:00:20 AM PST by Lando Lincoln

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.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bush; conservatives; gop; gwb2004; leftwing; liberals; rightwing; vichycons
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 821-831 next last
To: Lando Lincoln
Bump
41 posted on 02/11/2004 12:11:39 PM PST by EdReform (Free Republic - Now more than ever! Thank you for your support!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
"But you, madam, are terminally dense."

Really? I once heard it said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results. I don't like what I got the first time I helped elect Bush (spent a lot of hours working on that campaign...), so I'm not going to be insane enough to do the same thing and expect that the result will be any different. I suggest that you are the dense one...if you don't like what Bush is doing, why vote for him?

"B-b-but," I hear you sputter, "At least he's better than Kerry!" That may be. But I think we as a nation deserve better than to be forced to choose between a guy who sells us out quickly and a guy who sells us out slowly. Those are my principles, and I'm sticking to them.


Worth repeating: "If there is a problem it is not a problem caused by conservatives. It is our President doing a pretty good immitation of a wacko leftist with his domestic spending. Stop lecturing us. Lecture him."
42 posted on 02/11/2004 12:12:02 PM PST by Henrietta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
The importance of getting 60 seats in the Senate is that it is the political equivalent of driving a stake through the heart of the Democrats. We just don't want to beat the Dems, we want to pulverize them into powder, and then sweep the powder onto the ash heap of history.

Yes -- and that is a worthy goal -- but we should not delude ourselves into thinking that the GOP is going to pursue any real progress on conservative issues even after that is accomplished.

43 posted on 02/11/2004 12:12:26 PM PST by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Henrietta
You call us close-minded. I call us "principled."

I call you "head-up-arse"

Do you want to ask permission from the UN to fight our enemies (Frog Kerry does)? Then don't vote for Bush
44 posted on 02/11/2004 12:12:58 PM PST by kaktuskid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
And – I think this gets overlooked sometimes – this President and his advisors understand POLITICS. Tim Russert said last nite on the Dennis Miller Show that demographics have changed considerably since the 2000 election. More elderly, more “minorities”, more urban voters, etc. Russert said that if the 2000 vote were held with today’s demographics, GWB would lose the popular vote by over 3 MILLION votes!!!

Not as decisive as you make it sound. It has to play out through the electoral college. But in sheer numbers, yes, this sounds about right.

Then count in the 4 million formerly reliable GOP evangelical Christian voters who stayed home in 2000, a number that has been growing as more conservatives realize that the GOP uses 'bait' issues to get their votes but have no interest in delivering.

Conservatives will not be moved by goofy little articles.

Cut the spending. Slate NEA/DoE for phase out in two years. Enforce the immigration laws. Bring a constitutional amendment on marriage to the Senate and push it through in the next month.

Words are cheap. If they want conservative votes, they'd better do something conservative to earn them. Because they've worked hard to alienate us so far.
45 posted on 02/11/2004 12:15:14 PM PST by George W. Bush (It's the Congress, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
Are we ashamed of America such that we need a president to apologize for us at every turn?

Are we so ashamed of conservatve principles that we must abandon them?

Do we still cherish our unique Constitutional system and American heritage? Or are we ready to toss it overboard?

CFR.

46 posted on 02/11/2004 12:15:34 PM PST by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: kaktuskid
"I call you "head-up-arse" "

Ah, yes...namecalling...the last refuge of the ineloquent!
47 posted on 02/11/2004 12:15:37 PM PST by Henrietta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
Bump.
48 posted on 02/11/2004 12:17:00 PM PST by AmericanInTokyo (Another vote here for Bush, only IF Congress ends up defeating his illegal immigration amnesty law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Henrietta
But if he's gonna act like John Kerry, I'm not voting for him EVEN IF THAT MEANS WE GET JOHN KERRY.

Never would have suspected you for being narrow-sighted and childish. Pity.

49 posted on 02/11/2004 12:18:10 PM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
"Cut the spending. Slate NEA/DoE for phase out in two years. Enforce the immigration laws. Bring a constitutional amendment on marriage to the Senate and push it through in the next month."

I would add to this: Pledge a veto on the assault weapons ban. Make recess appointments of conservative judges, and let the Dems scream all they want to.

My vote is no longer for sale to those who mouth conservative principles during the election year "dog and pony" show and then wholly abandon them for the succeeding three. GWB needs to stop alienating conservatives, or he's gonna lose this election.
50 posted on 02/11/2004 12:18:35 PM PST by Henrietta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Grut; Sloth; Austin Willard Wright
If we reward Bush with unearned support,...

You're read the lists of reasons why Bush has earned your support -- here and elsewhere. You just prefer to bitch and moan make your own excuses rather than accept the benefits of the Bush administration.

True conservatives (who have the big picture and the good of our country at the core of their beliefs) realize that politics involves a certain amount of compromise and give and take. There will never be 100% agreement on all things by all of the people who make up our diverse republic.

To even hint that there is a better solution than Bush in this election is advocating a vote against your country -- and conservative values!
51 posted on 02/11/2004 12:19:59 PM PST by Fawnn (Canteen wOOhOO Consultant and CookingWithPam.com person)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: onyx
"Never would have suspected you for being narrow-sighted and childish. Pity."

Never would have suspected you for being lacking in principle and willing to sell your vote for the promise of Dem lite, when we all deserve so much better. Being principled takes backbone; there's nothing narrow sighted or childish about it.
52 posted on 02/11/2004 12:20:20 PM PST by Henrietta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Henrietta
I call us "principled." Maybe you should get some!

I was about ready to move on from this thread until your cute little retort. As is always the case with you fringe reactionaries, you can't sustain an argument on the merits without quickly descending into a huff about how principled you are and how much the other guy lacks principles. How convenient. Lacking common sense and anything but silly rhetoric with which to make your case, I supposed you do need to at least pretend you have the high ground.

53 posted on 02/11/2004 12:21:08 PM PST by Wolfstar (A self-confident cowboy nation, or a Kerrified nation. Your choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
It is the same with the witch-hunters, and smear artists of the media. Bush without his immigration views; Bush without Medicare drug coverage; Bush without the idiotic "No Child Left Behind" program in Education; Bush without foreign AIDS campaigns, etc., would be an infinitely stronger candidate than the Bush you defend.

Bump.

You know, we've quietly put up with quite a lot of insulting policy. They knew how we felt about it.

But Rove convinced them that they could finally dump the social conservatives and religious conservatives in one fell swoop and find liberal replacement voters.

And he's failed utterly.

Now they come crawling back, like a cheating husband rejected by his whores, begging our forgiveness, trying to blame us.

Their apologia had better be a lot more sincere than what we've seen so far. Because we now know that they want to dump us.
54 posted on 02/11/2004 12:21:10 PM PST by George W. Bush (It's the Congress, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
you fringe reactionaries

Sounds an awful lot like what John F. Kerry would say about us. You're in good company, huh?

55 posted on 02/11/2004 12:24:08 PM PST by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
...isn't "conservative" at all, as far as I'm concerned.

It isn't anything ideological. It's stupidity. Pure and simple. Such folks don't seem to have the brains God gave a chicken. (You may have noted that I'm in no mood to mince words today.)

56 posted on 02/11/2004 12:24:45 PM PST by Wolfstar (A self-confident cowboy nation, or a Kerrified nation. Your choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
"Words are cheap. If they want conservative votes, they'd better do something conservative to earn them. Because they've worked hard to alienate us so far."

bump!

57 posted on 02/11/2004 12:26:30 PM PST by KantianBurke (Principles, not blind loyalty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Sloth
Think of it this way....We succeed in consigning the Democrat Party to the dustbin of history, a new conservative party can rise up to take on the GOP! Then the two main parties in America can be a center-right party, and a hard-right party.
58 posted on 02/11/2004 12:26:33 PM PST by My2Cents ("Well...there you go again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
Bush proved to be every bit as much a big spending liberal as the dems.

Vote for him again? No sale!

59 posted on 02/11/2004 12:26:39 PM PST by Jim Cane (Vote Tancredo in '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sloth
Tell me what those "conservative principles are." Then we might have something to discuss.
60 posted on 02/11/2004 12:27:22 PM PST by Wolfstar (A self-confident cowboy nation, or a Kerrified nation. Your choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 821-831 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