Posted on 02/27/2004 1:01:58 AM PST by kattracks
President Bush fired back at his Democratic critics Monday night. After being a sitting duck for the slings and arrows fired at him by the “Hate Bush Brigade”, the White House says the President plans to go on the offensive.
It’s about time. We need to see a tough, straight-talking, Texas-style George Bush hammering away at his detractors. He also needs to reach out to his conservative base and remind them of what’s at stake in this election, because he has a problem with a lot of them.
In recent weeks my conservative listeners have been talking about the same things Kerry and Edwards have been talking about. They’re talking about jobs even though the unemployment rate is only 5.6 percent. They’re talking about outsourcing, they’re talking about amnesty for illegal aliens – these are the things that people who listen to talk radio are concerned about.
Their reaction to the President’s handling of these issues should be a warning sign for the President. Conservatives are calling my show and telling me that they are not going to vote for George Bush because of his stand on amnesty or outsourcing, for example. And this simply amazes me. I ask them if they aren’t going to vote to re-elect George Bush are they going to vote for the Democrat? And the answer is inevitably, "NO! I’m not going to vote for anybody. I’m going to stay home on Election Day."
My reply is if you stay home and George Bush doesn’t win re-election and instead Kerry or whoever the Democrat candidate is gets elected, do you think things are going to get really better? And their answer is, "Well, no, but I want to take a stand."
They should remember Custer. He too took a stand. It was his last.
That just stuns me because it’s utterly irrational. They don’t understand they are taking a stand against themselves. By not voting they only help elect a liberal Democrat who wants to raise their taxes, enact all kinds of new spending programs. They would also endanger the nation by their already demonstrated ineptness and weakness in the war on terror, and hand over Iraq to the United Nations so it can create the same kind of mess we are now seeing in Haiti – another UN and Clinton "success."
They are wearing blinders that only allow them to focus on one issue. They say they won’t vote for a candidate who disagrees with them on one single issue even though he agrees with them on every other issue. It’s utterly self-defeating.
Even though they staunchly support George Bush on his stands on tax cuts, how he is fighting the war, and applaud his pro-life policies, they disagree with him on the amnesty issue, for example, and therefore can’t bring themselves to vote for him.
They’ll just stay home and help elect a Democrat who disagrees with them on just about everything. They’d enact socialist programs that would cripple U.S. industry, yet some of my listeners applaud them not realizing that if you drive a company’s profits down, you drive the value of their stock down and the millions of Americans whose 401Ks are invested in that firm suffer losses as a result.
When President Bush goes on the offensive, he’s going to have to remind Americans that if they want to pay low prices for the goods they need, the reason they are going to have to look overseas is because Democrats in Congress have so regulated American companies that the cost of doing business has risen. That’s due to the unions and government regulations that have become so prohibitive.
What’s the Democrat answer? Well, they say they’d make foreign nations enact the same kind of onerous regulatory and environmental burdens we have here that would force the prices of their goods up to the same level as ours. In other words, wreck their own economies to make John Kerry or some other demagogue look good.
Fat chance.
Mike Reagan, the eldest son of President Ronald Reagan, is heard on more than 200 talk radio stations nationally as part of the Premiere Radio Network.
One more time, with feeling...
I can tell from the majority posts on this thread that it's fashionable to castigate such a position; however, eight months from the election, I would argue that this is a very respectable stance for conservative Republicans to take. Dubyuh's spending IS outta control and needs to be reined in...do we really believe he'll do it if all the pressure comes from those who are urging him to adopt the DemonRATS' big-spending proclivities? Heck no, Rove's already on record as saying conservatives have nowhere to go, all but saying "Screw us and all we hold dear!!" Threatening to sit out in November or vote Constitution Party will hopefully give Bush the political backbone to get spending under control, and he's already begun talking about cutting or eliminating 128 Federal programs and curtailing Discretionary Domestic spending to 1%. If he follows thru on this, I'll venture a lot of the disgruntled conservatives will return to the fold.
A similar issue is Dubyuh's proposed Non-amnesty Amnesty fer Illegals...I believe it is a principled conservative's duty to argue against such misguided policy!! Threatening to sit out--or vote third party--in November is a very respectable position, IMHO. And while I totally respect the BushOrBusters who dominate FReeperdom these days, I must admit that I grow tired with those who relentlessly criticize folks who are Conservatives first, and Republicans second. A more productive response--once again, IMHO--would be to help Dubyuh by getting to the crux of alienated Bush supporter's problems with Dubyuh and attempt overcome their hesitance to support Dubyuh again. Name-calling and derision simply solidifies their resolve to sit out what promises to be a very important election next November.
FReegards...MUD
Since no such bill has made its way to the President's desk, you might wish to rethink this statement.
I agree that he SHOULD NOT sign any such nonsense, but to proclaim such a patent untruth does no one any good.
Reread the Constituion, please.
Posting lies is evidence of being a Mobyite.
Do I have it right?
K & Y
Didn't the Dems just win one in KentuckY?
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/05/14/bush.gunban/
And what are you going to accomplish for America?
FReegards...MUD
......... BUSH -- CHENEY 2004........
Our fore fathers fought and died so that we can have a say in what your country does. When an individual gives up that right, they not only give up the right to bitch about the results actions, but they also dishonor those who fought and died so that you can vote.
And for anyone who thinks 'sitting this one out' will send a message to Rove, Bush, etc., think again. Do you honestly believe that? Look back at history. Hell, look back at the past 12 years. Has Bush managed to undo everything Clinton has done? No. Did Reagan undo everything Carter did? No. For every two steps forward a liberal takes, it takes a Republican at least one step backward to undo what has been done, quite often at the expense of conservatism.
So go ahead, sit this one out. You might as well sit every one out from this point on, because if Kerry is elected, you will NEVER see the kind of conservatism again that you see today in Bush today. Kerry would put our country on the fast road to hell. Now you might be saying, 'well Bush has us on the slow road to socialism. If we're going down that road, I'd rather do it and get it over with.' Well you know what? I'd rather take my chances trying to stop a slow moving train than trying to stop a train in the express lane.
PS: For anyone who thinks that any politician, regardless of party, will do or say everything they want, get back to the real world.
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.