Bush Aims To Forge A GOP Legacy

Washington Post ^ | 1/30/5 | Thomas B. Edsall and John F. Harris

[SmithL]

When President Bush stands before Congress on Wednesday night to deliver his State of the Union address, it is a safe bet that he will not announce that one of his goals is the long-term enfeeblement of the Democratic Party.

But a recurring theme of many items on Bush's second-term domestic agenda is that if enacted, they would weaken political and financial pillars that have propped up Democrats for years, political strategists from both parties say.

Legislation putting caps on civil damage awards, for instance, would choke income to trial lawyers, among the most generous contributors to the Democratic Party.

GOP strategists, likewise, hope that the proposed changes to Social Security can transform a program that has long been identified with the Democrats, creating a generation of new investors who see their interests allied with the Republicans.

Less visible policies also have sharp political overtones. The administration's transformation of civil service rules at federal agencies, for instance, would limit the power and membership of public employee unions -- an important Democratic financial artery.

If the Bush agenda is enacted, "there will be a continued growth in the percentage of Americans who consider themselves Republican, both in terms of self-identified party ID and in terms of their [economic] interests," said Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform and an operative who speaks regularly with White House senior adviser Karl Rove.

Many Democrats and independent analysts see a methodical strategy at work. They believe the White House has expressly tailored its domestic agenda to maximize hazards for Democrats and tilt the political playing field in the GOP's favor long after this president is out of the White House.

[iconoclast]

Bush is Not Conservative about retaining National Soverignity either.

He sucks conservatives in with lip service to social issues (which rarely find their way into legislation) while he pursues LBJ policies, both domestic and foreign.

[iconoclast]

I'm willing to use the power of the American purse to extirpate the enemy within. Once that's done we can easily put the country back on track.

Reagan spent on Defense and was forced by a Democrat congress to trade for domestic spending.

There is absolutely NO similarity between the Gipper and the current Republican regime.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

[sinkspur]

When you elicit a classic, nonsense sinkspur reply like that you know you've hit the nail square on the head! ;o)

Only gutless cowards use the names of other FReepers in posts and don't ping them.

[sinkspur]

He sucks conservatives in with lip service to social issues (which rarely find their way into legislation) while he pursues LBJ policies, both domestic and foreign.

Yeah. Let's hand Iraq back to Hussein.

[COEXERJ145]

The really scary fact is that if Richardson is their nominee he will probably get 95% of the Hispanic vote and Republicans will never again sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom.

Which would suit the Buchanan/Tancredo crowd just fine.

[bayourod]

From today's Rush program:

RUSH: " These same people that are coming in illegally, what would be the difference if those same people were allowed in legally and then you hired them? What would be the difference? "

CALLER: "Oh, no. I would love it if they were brought in legally."

RUSH: "That's all I'm saying."

[Veritas et equitas ad Votum]

So, you believe whatever Rush tells you to believe?

You seem to have no understanding of how a Constitutional Republic is supposed to operate. Or you have NO interest in living under one.

Our Constitution clearly spells out that the Federal Government has the power, and by implication, the obligation to repel invasion.

Can the illegal alien problem be called anything less?

[bayourod]

"You seem to have no understanding of how a Constitutional Republic is supposed to operate"

I'm still looking for that part of the Constitution that says the Fedral govt can tell States who they cannot issue drivers' licenses to. It must be in the same section on fishing licenses, marriage licenses, plumbers licenses, kiosk licenses, soliciting licenses, comcealed carry licenses, law licenses, ...

[bayourod]

"Our Constitution clearly spells out that the Federal Government has the power, and by implication, the obligation to repel invasion. "

"shall" is the operative word used in the Constitution. But until 1885 the states determined immigration and state courts naturalized foreigners into citizens.

But why don't you sue the Federal Government instead of bitching to me about Bush not doing enough to satisfy you?

[Veritas et equitas ad Votum]

I guess that was a "no" to the question of whether you read those articles.

Anyway, you're tired, your arguments are tired, and you have no answers other than being a Rush parrot and a Bush cheerleader.

Good luck to you.

[fallujah-nuker]

Likewise, I found your posts to be rather amusing, in particular the list of names of posters you are boycotting and the history behind the boycotts! In particular your post to Travis McGee and you spun the story!

I'm surprised that you did not take offense at my handle, sorry that my solution to the little brats of Fallujah who danced around the mutilated corpses of our guys is different from your ideal. I suppose in your world they would all be eligible for green cards?

Oh. and a little history on UNICEF, Reagan pulled us out of it, neither Bush Sr. or Clinton rejoined, Dubya did as a concession to gain support for Operation Iraqi Freedom in the UN, it gained us nothing.

You bring back memories of 1976 when I supported Reagan against Ford. We were labeled the right fringe back then too, so was Goldwater.

[fallujah-nuker]

Our form of government favors a two party system, but that is no guarantee that a party will remain as one of the two main parties. The Federalist, Democratic-Republican and Whigs can tell you all about it. The Whigs are the most recent example, they would not confront the slavery issue and were replaced by a third party with a "fringe" candidate for President, Abraham Lincoln. Those who turn a blind eye to illegal immigration to court wealthy donors who want cheap labor have their counterparts in our past history. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

[fallujah-nuker]

RS wrote "So lets re-cap --- you're glad that Perot kept Bush from beating Clinton, because Bush's loss led to the House becoming Republican, which lead to welfare reform and a ( so-called) balanced budget for two years....

...which are basically the only things that Clinton can point to as part of his great legacy !"

Reminds me of Winston Churchill's reaction to his parties loss to Labor in 1945. His wife tried to console him and suggested that it was "a blessing in disguise." Without missing a beat, Churchill replied "if so, the disguise was perfect." I guess that would have summed up my feelings at the time in 1992, but 1994 would not have happened without it.

You seem not to realize the value of holding the House of Representatives, which controls the purse strings. From the date of Ikes's inauguration to Clinton's the GOP held the White House 70% of the time, while the Democrats held the house all but 2 years, 95% of the time. Federal spending ballooned during this time, while under the GOP the budget was brought into balance, in spite of Clinton who you seem to credit for it. He only signed on to welfare reform because Dick Morris told him he could kiss a second term goodbye if he vetoes it.

What you term as Clinton's "great legacy" was only the result of a GOP congress and his own apostate conversion to welfare reform.

[fallujah-nuker]

RS wrote "So lets re-cap --- you're glad that Perot kept Bush from beating Clinton, because Bush's loss led to the House becoming Republican, which lead to welfare reform and a ( so-called) balanced budget for two years....

...which are basically the only things that Clinton can point to as part of his great legacy !"

Reminds me of Winston Churchill's reaction to his parties loss to Labor in 1945. His wife tried to console him and suggested that it was "a blessing in disguise." Without missing a beat, Churchill replied "if so, the disguise was perfect." I guess that would have summed up my feelings at the time in 1992, but 1994 would not have happened without it.

You seem not to realize the value of holding the House of Representatives, which controls the purse strings. From the date of Ikes's inauguration to Clinton's the GOP held the White House 70% of the time, while the Democrats held the house all but 2 years, 95% of the time. Federal spending ballooned during this time, while under the GOP the budget was brought into balance, in spite of Clinton who you seem to credit for it. He only signed on to welfare reform because Dick Morris told him he could kiss a second term goodbye if he vetoes it.

What you term as Clinton's "great legacy" was only the result of a GOP congress and his own apostate conversion to welfare reform.

[Once-Ler]

Likewise, I found your posts to be rather amusing,

I spread sunshine where ever I go.

I'm surprised that you did not take offense at my handle

If you want to nuke Iraq I want you to proclaim it with your loudest voice. Don't listen to Freepers with human feelings. They are too weak to recognize your brilliant blunt force trauma strategy. HULK SMASH!!!!!

Oh. and a little history on UNICEF,

Fascinating. I don't see what it has to do with the topic but I am finally ready for Jeopardy. Alex Trebeck I'm coming for you!

We were labeled the right fringe back then too, so was Goldwater.

I commend your right fringe stamina.

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

The Gipper spent the Soviet Union out of existence. W is spending the 'Rat Party out of existence. Mmmmm, the coffee smells great!

[iconoclast]

Only gutless cowards use the names of other FReepers in posts and don't ping them.

Wow, your page must runneth over, but fear not, I promise not to neglect you again.

One caution, never confuse fear with disdain.

[sinkspur]

In your case, I'm not confused.

[iconoclast]

Yeah. Let's hand Iraq back to Hussein.

I'd swap you Saddam and his WMD's for the three years, thousands of killed and wounded GI's, and multi-billions of dollars poured into the sand.

Then we could back up and get on with the WOT, closing borders, and shoring up our defenses and our economy.

[sinkspur]

I'd swap you Saddam and his WMD's for the three years, thousands of killed and wounded GI's, and multi-billions of dollars poured into the sand.

Of course you would. You don't give a damn about anybody but yourself.