What speeches have you been listening to. I've heard almost everything he's said, and there is NOTHING he's said that fits that (strange) description.
Let's back up. You said he was 'antagonizing' conservatives on a thread about ending abortion. As a strong pro-life, extremely conservative Bush supporter, I challenged your assertion.
At no point did I claim he was conservative in all areas..........because he's not. But in the areas of life and the judiciary he is. And to me this is the most conservative, and important thing that any President can do.
Thanks for all your posts, ohio. I had to leave and take care of my mom plus paint the house outside.
Wise of me to ping you, eh? Look what a great stand in I got! Sorry for the totally dense, anti-Bush ones who claim he supports murder of the unborn when he has made more progress against that than anyone in history since Rpe.
Reminds me of the saying..."Do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good".
LOL! Yourself. You don't listen very well.
Take a look at just the last two months (and it has been frequent and often if you know how to listen). Try the State of the Union speech.
Just who do you think he was castigating when called those he disagrees with over defending free enterprise here in the United States, and our industrial infrastructure to defend our nation..."protectionists", "isolationists" "retreaters" and so on?
And then just last week in AirForceOne he played the "race" card over the Dubai Ports World deal, threatening to veto any Congressional prohibition, implying that it was Anti-Arab xenophonic or bigoted to oppose the deal. Both Laura Ingraham, Bill Bennett, Michelle Malkin, Dennis Prager, Hugh Hewitt, all agreed that was a clear and inescapable inference. For you not to have 'heard' that is preposterous.
And to underline that it was not 'accidental mispeak'...The White House pushed that line immediately, getting David Brooks (NYT), Robert Novak, the Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal, Reuters, ABC News, etc to pursue that slant of the story.
There have been many other previous instances when he has reached for the Liberal castigatory tool to challenge his opposition on the Right. From Gay issues (Don't Ask, Don't Tell)...to Bloated Unconstitutional Kennedy bill further Federalizing of Education...belittling the opponents as "perpetuating the soft bigotry of low expectations."
This is an indirect way of calling small government republican conservatives...bigots. The RATS try to criminalize policy differences. The President tries to demonize his conservative critics. There are many examples. If I thought it was worth the time, I would do a book on it.
No kidding. Just take a look how he attempted to demonize the opponents of his lawless Border non-enforcement...calling the Minuteman group..."Vigilantes." Rhetorically just a hairsbreadth from saying they are a lynch mob.
But in the areas of life and the judiciary he is.
Harriet Meiers would have been a Trojan Horse in that regard. At all points. Thank God her speech to that Texas Women's Bar Assn "outed her"...supporting the "privacy right" underpinning the Roe decision...and the last support for her collapsed. Meiers was responsible for torpedoing...from within the White House...the Solicitor General's positions in a number of cases. From affirmative action in Michigan's Law School to Texas's sodomy laws.
To say the least, the Meiers nomination, justified "because she was a woman", castigating the "glass ceiling"...as if the conservative opponents were somehow sexist.... casts grave doubts on this president. His sincerity. His political integrity. And clearly, he is no conservative.
Remember how Mark Twain opined that "The thirteenth stroke of a clock is not only false of itself, but it casts exceedingly grave doubts about the veracity of the preceding twelve!"
And to me this is the most conservative, and important thing that any President can do.
So long as he is not handing that Court a fait accomplice with a whole new slew of constituional abdications, surrenders and contradictions of limited government. The Prescription Drug Benefit, an $18 Trillion Unfunded Liability. The Social Security Unfunded Liability is itself only what, $10 billion? Campaign Finance Reform which throttles political free speech...among the most essential areas of speech freedom!
The $48 billion in Pork fund earmarks he went along with to bribe Congress to approve CAFTA: An agreement which is inimical to the free enterprise of small businesses in the U.S., but does heartily favor massive BIG business to relocate to those nations and re-export to us. A trade deal which needed to be passed as a treaty, but was passed as an agreement. A trade deal which abdicated our Constitutional protections of our own court system, and deferred to rulings by an Intl Panel.
And guess what else he has been pushing? The Law Of the Sea Treaty! Reagan rejected this for a whole raft of solid conservative reasons...it inherently conflicted with our national sovereignty and interests, and fired all of the State Dept. cronies who had pushed for it. Xlinton hired them all back. Bush has kept them on and is teetering over it...indicating he would sign it! Another massive infringement on U.S. Sovereignty...that would allow the UN to tax the US and all its seaborne activities directly, setting itself up as the long-delayed World Government. So it can promptly start redistributing our wealth to...who knows...Africa? India? China? (Like they're not getting it fast enough already!)
Remember how Karl Rove famously told us off, "Where will you go?" As if the RATS were the only alternative. No. The option never mentioned is that we reject his either/or choice, and instead move to recapture the Party for true conservatives. No more Xlintonian 'triangulation'. We need to go to the polls in a sufficiently nationally-organized way...and flush down the toilet every single blasted RINO and get true conservatives on the ballot and take back this government!