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.
Which doesn't say it isn't a choice. It certainly is.
You can't even bring yourself to give him credit for any good that he's done. Change your screen name, please. It's very deceiving.
Quit crying. All conservatives don't march in lock step, cadence behind the Republican party. Some of us think for ourselves out here.
I, for one, hope you and the rest of the coercive naysayers who haunt these fine discussion threads never darken the door of the Republican Party again.
I must be painful for you to deal with the truth, when it's brought up. But that's too damn bad.
Unlike you, I refuse to sit in silence in the face of wrong. Unlike you, I will offer my honest opinion when I see fit.
You remind me of the story about the kings clothes, while all the people on the road were too scared or didn't want to offend the naked king, they all commented on how nice his clothes looked, while one little boy had the guts and honesty to point out that the king was butt naked.
Learn the difference between negativity and justified criticism.
You're a pimple on the arse of the body politic.
You wouldn't say this to my face, so don't it here. End the personal attacks. Or are a just a selected few immune from the rules?
Oh please .. give me a break
Let me tell you a story about my oldest daughter when she was little
One day it had been raining really hard and that she wanted to go out to play.
I said that's not a good idea ... because I knew she'd get all wet if she did and she wouldn't like it
She didn't like that answer .. so I tried to make her happy by making cookies
That still didn't work .. so I tried giving her other things
But still .. that didn't work
Finally I said .. Fine you want to play outside .. Go for it .. open the door and let her go
And guess what .. she then started crying because she was all wet and wanted to come back inside
The reason for me telling that story??
One would think after the 8 year nightmare we all went through .. one wouldn't want to go back outside and get wet again
One would think they learned their lesson
And one would think they would want to make things better .. instead of making it worse
584 posted on 02/12/2004 12:53:29 PM CST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet ("Lashing out" at Democrats since 1990.)
See? I told ya so! Nah, nah nah nah nah nah. :^}
Further demonstrating that you lack the clarity of mind to "think." You have not paid to attention to the missives spewed by the hopefuls.
I Appreciate that.
Some of us don't "follow" the crowd and we make lousy "yes" men. Thank God there are still some American's that will question those in political power, instead of just winking and nodding and following them blindly down the slippery slope. Some of us don't treat those in political office as celebrities. That's what they do in third world countries, with their political leaders pictures plastered all over the landscape. I don't want autographs, or a celebrity, I want someone who will support and defend the constitution, defend our borders and sovereignty, and do the job they took the oath to do.
It takes no guts to capitulate and yield to the whims of politicians just because the say they are on your side, or happen to belong to your political party. Those that are willing to put their political party before country regardless of consequences, are no better than others with a special interest or personal agenda.
Didn't you say the same thing about 40 posts ago?
Why thank you. I have presented several arguments of which you have failed to answer one. What you have done is continued personal attacks questioning my conservatism, my ability to think for myself, and ignorance in not 'understanding' how it 'is'. All you've done is show a complete lack of an argument proving your point. Rather emotions based on nothing more than party loyalty
What you have not done is what you should have been doing since 2002, which is to question why this man you praise in effect partially reduced the sovereignty of this nation of states by calling for re-entry into UNESCO, something that Ronald Reagan, a conservative President, had removed this nation of states from.
And contrary to your opinion, for that's all it is, if this nation of states was truly attacked by another sovereign nation, nothing a figurehead sitting in the White House could say would quell the uproar if he did not call for immediate and swift reprisals against said nation. Kerry and the boys may talk but that's all it is. Talk.
Just an observation.
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.