Posted on 05/05/2005 9:13:01 AM PDT by metalmanx2j
A lot of thoughtful conservatives are having serious second thoughts about George W. Bush. His failure to act upon core values of fiscal conservatism and sovereignty is a growing concern.
Donations to conservative organizations and think tanks are in sharp decline. A lot of conservatives have decided to stop giving financial support because they are losing faith in the ability of these groups to have any effect on administration policies.
Bush has an engaging personality, but he’s not running for office anymore. He is already a very lame duck.
In concert with Republican party leaders in Congress, the White House has been unable to get its judicial appointments approved and the fight over John Bolton’s appointment as UN ambassador suggests the party lacks unity on Capitol Hill. Bolton has been confirmed four times for previous positions. Unless the GOP can unite to overcome the obstructionism of the Democrats, it bodes ill for the party.
If conservatives stay home for the 2006 elections, power can shift to the Democrats.
People are increasingly worried about the huge budget deficit created by a President and a Congress that have been on a spending binge. The national debt has increased by $2.16 billion every day since September 30, 2004. It is now a cliché that Bush has not vetoed a single spending bill while in office. New “entitlements” added to Medicare for prescriptions will add still more to the rising tide of national debt. It is not “if” the economy will reach a tipping point this accumulated debt cannot be paid, but when.
Compounding fears is the appearance of an increasingly shaky economy that includes rising inflation and major corporations like General Motors in trouble. Wall Street is experiencing early tremors that forecast a bear market.
An issue reaching critical mass are the illegal immigrants flowing across our southern border. The assertion that they are necessary to do the work that Americans will not is nonsense. With the exception of the agricultural sector that has always depended on migrant workers, there are many jobs American workers would take if they weren’t already being given to undocumented workers paid in cash. Illegal workers sent $20 billion dollars home to Mexico last year!
History will record that George W. Bush secured the liberation of the Iraqi people from one of the worst tyrants of modern times. Let us give him credit for that and for driving the Taliban out of Afghanistan. What rankles was the way the war was sold as an eminent threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction. I cannot think of a time this nation went to war on such poor intelligence. One gets the feeling, however, that the Bush administration has little faith in the intelligence of the American people.
Yet another distinctly un-conservative aspect of the Bush administration has been its approach to education. The “Leave No Child Behind” program has thrown billions at an already failed educational system. It is so awful that whole states are considering withdrawing from it. And the Bush administration is pushing for programs that would require all students to undergo mental health evaluations, thus opening the door to still more millions of them being required to take mind-altering drugs.
Many conservatives fear that homeland security is an excuse for circumscribing fundamental constitutional protections. Most certainly, the Patriot Act needs revision, but the administration does not support that. There is talk of installing chips in passports that will carry all kinds of personal information about you. More insidious is the effort to require Americans to carry a national ID card. This is more consistent with a police state than with conservative values.
As Americans confront rising gasoline prices, they are wondering if we have an energy policy. There’s scant evidence. It’s nice to know Alaska’s ANWR may be opened up to oil extraction, but this nation hasn’t seen a new refinery built since the 1970’s, down from 321 refineries in 1981 to 146 now. Current refineries are running at 95% capacity and, thanks to the Environmental Protection Agency, they have to produce 45 “regional blends” of gasoline. It will be years before any oil starts to flow from ANWR. Meanwhile, other reserves of oil and coal are ruled off-limits to extraction and use.
Finally, under the Bush administration, the federal government remains hell bent on acquiring more and more of the nation’s landmass. It’s in cahoots with environmental organizations, offering them millions in federal funds, to assist in this travesty. There’s even an “Invasive Species” bill floating around that would put the EPA in control of your front lawn. Why isn’t the Bush administration out front on killing this monstrosity?
Does any of this sound like conservative policy to you? Does it worry you that the threat of terrorism is the sole reason given for almost any policy put forth by the White House since 9-11? If the Democrats ever get their act together, you and I are going to be talking about President Clinton, but referring to Hillary.
Thank you for that insightful post.
Have faith. Bush is a poker player - and must have a long term strategy. Chinese wages average $2 per loaded hour. Ours average about $26. How're we supposed to compete with those stats?! Where're we going to get third world workers to work for those wages? Helloooooo Mexico. A vast unlimited supply. Once the nation is flooded with illegals working at $6 an hour - US companies can be enticed to return to employ not only illegals, but also homegrown Americans - whose wages will have equalized with global averages - so we can compete with all the outsourcers and indigenous companies producing in Asia and Latin America.
It's the only thing I can think of to explain his immigration policy. Kind of makes sense from an Olympian perspective, once the slo-mo train wreck is over and done with. Maybe Bush does have the right plan, after all. Flame away from both sides...
Ah, I see - illegal immigration just ain't a big deal. Nor is spending.
We need bona-fide GOP nominated judges on the bench. Like Sanda Day O'Connor. And David Souter. Yep, that'll really turn around that renegade judiciary.
Actually, yes. It's only been in the last 5 years or so that I've begun to truly dislike Carter. I even gave Bill Clinton the benefit of the doubt for the first year of his Presidency.
We are never going to agree with everything a President does - no matter who he is or what party he belongs to. There are things I have criticized Bush for, and there are things he's done that I've been pleased as punch about. With Bush it is more often the latter. With Clinton, it was more often the former.
So, because of 9/11 conservatives should now support the trashing of the 1st Amend with CFR, massive growth in government entitlement spending that will cost TRILLIONS of dollars over the next couple decades, massive expansion of the federal governments role in and control of education, open borders, and far more things that if a democrat was President conservatives would be ravines in their criticism about?
Haha! You have to be the funniest troll I've seen in a while. Congrats. :-)
Hmmm... I'll have to do the search again, without the filter on.
My point is, just because judges are GOP-nominated, it doesn't mean they will swing the tide. So we can't count on judicial nominations to end the rot - it needs to be addressed in all three branches of government.
Conservatives shouldn't stay home on election day. They need to go out and vote for people who will uphold their values.
They need to get involved now and make sure there is a party that puts conservative candidates on the ballot who will our defend sovereignty and stop over taxing and over spending in our government.
The toad comment is definitely one of the stranger flames I've seen on FR. *LOL*
Maybe if it was a horny toad...
I don't disagree with you. My point is, if the pigs in congress are squealin', we must be stickin' 'em where it hurts!
The issues of sound money management and political borders are not centrist, liberal, conservative or radical concepts. Management of money and protection of borders are matters essential to the success of all governments, irrespective of philosophy. ;-)
excellent summary
Our criticisms of Bush on domestic policies have no relation to supporting the troops. That is a red herring argument. Criticism is healthy. And NO. everything didn't change since 9/11. The biggest change was that we took the fight to the enemy.
As a strong backer of George Bush in 2000 and 2004, I never gave "unqualified" support. And few in the ranks of conservatives did either. The issue is: in the political struggle for the future of America, what is to be done? I would argue that we criticize the policies we don't like, but within the general stance of support for the President. (This I did in Bush's first term, and continue now, especially with regards border soverignty.) Beyond that, George W. Bush isn't going to be elected again. So begin to work for candidates who more nearly support your values and interests.
Maybe. I would like to see documentation. What would be telling is a drop in contributions to the RNC or the RNSC.
good points. What many don't realize is that while we may criticize Bush on domestic policies, we are keenly aware that electing somewhat like Kerry would be disastrous beyond words. We do indeed need to pick leaders that truly believe in reduced government spending.
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.