Posted on 08/24/2005 1:15:06 AM PDT by Dr. Marten
Conservative lawblogger Stephen Bainbridge is getting a lot of what they call in Washington strange new respect for his strongly-worded criticism of the Presidents international and domestic policies. While liberals like Kevin Drums commenters are quick to gloat about Bainbridges lament, and more tellingly, some Bush backers have accused Bainbridge of recycling leftist cant, Bainbridge has rather solidly made a conservative not leftist, not paleocon case against President Bush:
Its time for us conservatives to face facts. George W. Bush has pissed away the conservative moment by pursuing a war of choice via policies that border on the criminally incompetent. We control the White House, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and (more-or-less) the judiciary for one of the few times in my nearly 5 decades, but what have we really accomplished? Is government smaller? Have we hacked away at the nanny state? Are the unborn any more protected? Have we really set the stage for a durable conservative majority?
He continues with a critique of the shifting rationales for the Iraq War and asks,
if Iraqs alleged WMD programs were the casus belli, why arent we at war with Iran and North Korea? Not to mention Pakistan, which remains the odds-on favorite to supply the Islamofascists with a working nuke. If Saddams cruelty to his own people was the casus belli, why arent we taking out Kim Jong Il or any number of other nasty dictators? Indeed, what happened to the W of 2000, who correctly proclaimed nation building a failed cause and an inappropriate use of American military might? And why are we apparently going to allow the Islamists to write a more significant role for Islamic law into the new Iraqi constitution? If throwing a scare into the Saudis was the policy, so as to get them to rethink their deals with the jihadists, which has always struck me as the best rationale for the war, have things really improved on that front?
Though Bainbridge is spot-on in his analysis of the terrible miscalculations made by Bush and Rumsfeld during the war in Iraq, I take issue with his characterization of the war as the reason Bush and the Republican Party have abandoned domestic conservatism. In fact, a strong case can be made that Bush, Rove, and Congressional Republicans had no intention to advance a domestic conservative agenda in the first place.
Agreed. But we were screamed at by the statist Bushbots on FR when we first brought this up. The GOP is mostly a joke. Where's the conservatism in big government?
A little less compassion, and a little more conservatism, please.
We already are giving in. This war has had 10 times more casualties than it needed to because of our tiptoeing around politics. If this war was run by the military and not politicians, we would've leveled every mosque than a bullet came from, leveled every Syrian terrorist camp, tortured every prisoner for vital information, and called the media on every lie they constructed.
Limited government is a dead idea. Neither Party will deliver that. Only larger government shaped by their respective social agendas.
The divide on FR and in general is that some of us will fight to revive the idea and others (most of us, I'm sorry to say) will roll over.
George W. Bush's non-defense spending makes Bill Clinton's pale by comparison.
Bush has pushed more spending by the federal Dept. of Education which has never educated a single child. He has increased funding of the National Endowment for the Arts which agency Republicans once targeted for complete elimination for its wasteful and unnecessary federal spending.
Bush also signed the most profligate spending fiasco in U.S. history in the form of that massive farm subsidies bill.
There are no "small government" types left in Washington, in either major party.
Sssshhh, don't criticise Bush, it makes you a Kerry supporter! </sarc>
"And do not forget that Reagan did not avenge our Marines!!!!!!!!"
Until Afghanistan that had always bothered me in "nothing we can do about it" kind of way.
Cutting and running from Lebanon.
To those who complain that Dubya is no Ronald Reagan, I say....THAT'S A GOOD THING
I received a call the other day from the National Republican Party asking for money. The poor guy got an ear-full from me. All of my years working in politics to help get Republicans in the majority, and look what they do! so "sweetie, sweetie", just "getting along" with the dems! I've had it with them rubbing elbows with the enemy. They've all got a limited amount of time to prove themselves--or they're out!!
You joined the ranks of ms. cinderbrain, and moore, and now you're annoyed that the similarities are noticed?????????
ancient_geezer has the fairtax ping list. He's the resident genius on the subject. He'll gladly add you if you ping him.
"In fact, a strong case can be made that Bush, Rove, and Congressional Republicans had no intention to advance a domestic conservative agenda in the first place."===========================================
* * *
Bush faces GOP fight over guest workers
* * *
President Bush faces a major rebellion within his own party if he follows through on a promise to push legislation that would offer millions of illegal immigrants a path to U.S. citizenship. Almost no issue divides Republicans as deeply.
Another example is that of border security and illegal immigration.Republicans are supposed to be tough on terror, but when it comes to the thousands of miles of unprotected borders, Republicans are playing politics while the security of America is at stake.
To fight a real war on terror, government officials must make it as tough as possible for terrorists to enter the country illegally.
Yet, whenever some Republicans come forward and talk about fighting illegal immigration and increasing border security, other Republicans are backing down under fear of being called "racist" or "insensitive."
Perhaps Republican legislators need to increase the calcium in their diets so they can grow a backbone.
Instead of the image of tough legislators fighting for conservative values and issues, the images that come to mind more often than not when thinking of Republicans in Washington are those of a family of jellyfish.
I don't recall them calling for war with Iran and North Korea.
Thanks, so few on this site agree with us.
Huh an education bill the NEA hates, is "big government crap"(BGC), the tax cut is BGC, signing a partial birth abortion ban is BGC.
JMO, if the all of DC closed up shop, you would call it BGC.
JMO, you are a malcontent and will never be pleased. You live to complain and always will.
FYI - that's not an accurate statement. Source
1-demonstrated the superiority of conservative tax policy, possibly forever banishing "tax cuts for the rich" from the liberal playbook, certainly rendering it useless.
2-No matter what one thinks of the decision to go into Iraq, the liberals have been exposed as weak on defense. No matter the outcome of Iraq, I will never be convinced we would be safer with Saddam Hussein still out there, with billions of dollars and motive to do us harm.
3-Bush has provided a stark contrast between Clinton's "government by poll watching" and government by conviction.
4-Bush has helped expose the MSM's pitifull predictive powers, their extreme negativism if not their bias.
5-Bush has seized moral high-ground from the Dems as relates to minorities, and helped to expose the lie that Republicans are bigoted. For the future, no small thing, this one.
6-The Bush II tenure has been scandal free, another stark contrast which bodes well for future Republican campaigns for any office.
You're actually defending the Ted Kennedy education bill?!?
And as for my complaining, you just hear it from me because you usually promote all the socialist crap that I'm against! You're a troll to the max. Probably bought and paid for. A mental whore.
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.