At Conservative Forum on Bush, Everybody's a Critic

washingtonpost.com ^ | Wednesday, March 8, 2006 | Dana Milbank

[beeler]

If the ancient political wisdom is correct that a charge unanswered is a charge agreed to, the Bush White House pleaded guilty yesterday at the Cato Institute to some extraordinary allegations.

"We did ask a few members of the Bush economic team to come," explained David Boaz, the think tank's executive vice president, as he moderated a discussion between two prominent conservatives about President Bush. "We didn't get that."

Now why would the administration pass up such an invitation?

Well, it could have been because of the first speaker, former Reagan aide Bruce Bartlett. Author of the new book "Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy," Bartlett called the administration "unconscionable," "irresponsible," "vindictive" and "inept."

It might also have had something to do with speaker No. 2, conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan. Author of the forthcoming "The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It; How to Get It Back," Sullivan called Bush "reckless" and "a socialist," and accused him of betraying "almost every principle conservatism has ever stood for."

Nor was moderator Boaz a voice of moderation. He blamed Bush for "a 48 percent increase in spending in just six years," a "federalization of public schools" and "the biggest entitlement since LBJ."

True, the small-government libertarians represented by Cato have always been the odd men out of the Bush coalition. But the standing-room-only forum yesterday, where just a single questioner offered even a tepid defense of the president, underscored some deep disillusionment among conservatives over Bush's big-spending answer to Medicare and Hurricane Katrina, his vast claims of executive power, and his handling of postwar Iraq.

Bartlett, who lost his job at the free-market National Center for Policy Analysis because of his book, said that if conservatives were honest, more would join his complaint.

[beeler]

Yet more evidence of conservative disillusionment with the GOP thanks to Bush. We need a Regean conservative in '08 or we're in serious trouble.

[digger48]

Glad you put a lot of stock in Dana Milbanks assessment of this.

I can't say I do.

[EagleUSA]

No two ways about it. Bush hid his real self very well during his first campaign. And it came out in spades during his second....the globalist/elitist/near-liberal crawled out from under the faux-conservative makeup.

[facedown]

If the ancient political wisdom is correct that a charge unanswered is a charge agreed to...

How utterly childish. More often, a charge unanswered is a charge too moronic to waste time on.

I know, it should be "on which to waste time", but that sounds weird.

[jackbenimble]

Just about every State that has a ballot initiative process has already passed an Amendment banning gay marriage. I wonder how the Republicans will get conservatives to the polls for the next few elections? I see nothing but dissillusionment and anger on the forums I visit with a few RNC operatives trying to hold things together.

[EagleUSA]

"How utterly childish. More often, a charge unanswered is a charge too moronic to waste time on."
-----
Not quite so fast. Just take a look at how Bush has buried his pro-illegal, pro-open-border position. With virtually complete silence. His charges are totally unanswered...and it will stay that way too.

[Blueflag]

GOP is analogous to a religion
"Conservative" is analogous to a faith.

Religions often vary from the faith as they are subject to human failings, dogma and doctrine.

Conservatism is a set of principles, priorities and values that would define a guide a governing body's actions.

That the Republican Party (the religion if you will) would stray from the faith is not to be unexpected in a world of Realpolitik.

Net: conservatives ought to blame themselves for [having the] the illusion that the current Republican party is conservative. Acknowledge the differences between conservatism and Republicanism and SELL 'Republicans' on the value of being conservative. Don't be a critic, be persuasive and realistic.

[Sweetjustusnow]

"the globalist/elitist/near-liberal crawled out from under the faux-conservative makeup."

Couldn't have said it better or agree with you more.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I like CATO but take their recommendations with a pinch of salt. Some of their stuff is just not real world.

[Halgr]

I've been a conservative republican forever....and I am no longer going to tout the Party Line.

[Blueflag]

Um, where they gonna go?? DU?

Conservatives' anger with the GOP is directed at the GOP for betraying the faith, for being disingenuous, for being too liberal. At least our argument with the GOP is fairly principled. We don;t tend to 'eat our young' and attack the people -- we attack what they say and do. THAT is a good thing.

The 'other side' offers ** N O T H I N G** to conservatives.

[Patrick1]

Milbanks wear his hunting outfit?

[digger48]

the article just seemed like a lot of partial quotes, with no context, by people with an ax to grind.

Otherwise, the little pansy-@ss puke at the Post would never have touched it.

[Blackirish]

I'm hopin Rudy.

No more inside southern good ol boys....clintoon...W...Allen...they can't say no to there friends.

I want an outsider Yankee skinflint.

[Blueflag]

AS you should not! You are on the right track.

Conservatives are what we are. "Republicans" are how many are acting out their actual beliefs -- which, though largely conservative are not wholly conservative.

Personally, I have never trotted out the Party line unless it was also my line. Where the Party line is also "my line" then I am a Republican. I only donate to candidates, never the Party.

Don't let this worry you. Let it motivate you. Get off our collective arses and LEAD!

[eskimo]

How utterly childish. More often, a charge unanswered is a charge too moronic to waste time on.

Perhaps, that is sometimes true but this time the charges are obviously the reality of the day.

[A.Hun]

"This is a big-government agenda," he said. "It is fueled by a new ideology, the ideology of Christian fundamentalism." The bearded pundit offered his own indictment of Bush: "complete contempt" for democratic processes, torture of detainees, ignoring habeas corpus and a "vast expansion of the federal government."

I didn't know that the Cato Institute was part of DU.

[FlipWilson]

Quote: "Glad you put a lot of stock in Dana Milbanks assessment of this.

I can't say I do."

Yah, but still, it is consistent. This administration just lets the charges pile up. Take Iraq, for example. The President left the field to the democrats all of last year and he paid for it. Finally, he started making his case again and made up some ground, but not nearly all that he had lost. What is he doing now? Why, he is back to ceding the ground to the democrats on Iraq. Same with the ports (I disagree with his stance, but would LOVE to hear his rational for it), same with border security/immigration, same with the economy, SAME WITH KARTRINA,etc. etc.

The President has either given up and his on cruise mode or needs to wholesale FIRE his communications team. The administration seems to just presume that the voters will just "get it" by magic. The voters will just look at the other side's arguments and reject them because, well, because. Lazy? Out of touch? Whatever the reasoning, with the hostile MSM and the unhinged dems stooping to levels never before seen, the President has to be on the attack defending his policies everyday. In addition, he should be reaching out to his base and truly understanding their concerns on key issues, i.e. immigration.

This President is utterly failing to do these things and is paying for it. I suppose it will hit him when he is being impeached by the democrat congress. I can hear it now, "Uhh, geee, Carl, maybe we misunderestimated the conquences?"

[beeler]

A Giuliani nomination would be a death blow to the Republican party.

[woofie]

If Reagan was President you wouldnt like him