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.

[jveritas]

It was Sharon who decided to abandon Gaza with the approval of majority of Israelis.

In regards to Hizballah, the Bush administration considers it one of the most dangerous terrorist organizations in the world and is pressing the Lebanese government to disarm Hizballah.

I have no idea what do you mean in your third point.

[A.Hun]

Sounds like Marx to me...

Use that bait with someone else...

[A.Hun]

God help us!! Open your eyes, please!

Try opening yours to the alternative to George Bush.

[pollyannaish]

The theoretical absolute conservatism advocated by some on FR and elsewhere means total defeat at the polls.

I would also like to add that it often comes from not knowing, understanding or listening to people who do not agree with your particular world view. I'm not talking about the activists on the far left fringe, but the vast number in the middle who find activists on either side odd and irritating.

When one quits preaching, takes off the choir robe, and steps out of the church, one rediscovers the political necessity of big picture insight and perspective. Just like politicians need to get out of the beltway more often, conservatives need to hang out with liberals more often. It makes us better, and makes us stronger.

[clawrence3]

Would shutting down every gas station in the U.S. be a "common sense defensive measure"?

[eskimo]

Try opening yours to the alternative to George Bush.

Just because one is told to pick their favorite big government socialist political oportunist as leader doesn't mean that one must stupidly do so.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

...the Bush administration considers it one of the most dangerous terrorist organizations in the world and is pressing the Lebanese government to disarm Hizballah.

And how's that working out for them?

[eskimo]

Huh?

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Exactly.

As James Bovard says, our elections are like reverse slave auctions.

Personally, I don't find the prospect of choosing between the evil of two lessers appealing.

[A.Hun]

Just because one is told to pick their favorite big government socialist political oportunist as leader doesn't mean that one must stupidly do so.

What can I say? We had two choices...John Kerry or George Bush.

Getting so angry with Bush that you would put Dems in office makes no sense. Unfortunately, from the crop of likely candidates, Bush might be the most conservative President we will see for a long time.

[ARCADIA]

Personally, I don't find the prospect of choosing between the evil of two lessers appealing.

Leave it to the socialist and communist to squabble over their D's and R's; I support neither.

[eskimo]

Getting so angry with Bush that you would put Dems in office makes no sense.

Indeed it does not.

Unfortunately, from the crop of likely candidates, Bush might be the most conservative President we will see for a long time.

If that is true, America is lost.

[Blueflag]

Your use of "nothing" is likely an exaggeration on your part.

There is no logic in 'taking your ball and going home.' DON'T let THEM (the Left) gain power. ANYTHING and EVERYTHING they do will be worse for "true conservatives" than the NOTHING and EVERYTHING the Left does.

[jackbenimble]

I have parents in their eighties that benefit from it.

Your parents drugs are not my problem. Republicans used to understand that.

President Bush ran on a much smaller plan that he allowed to be passed. His words at the time were: "just get a bill to my desk and I'll sign it". He was more interested in a political victory then good governance. It still disgusts me.

[beeler]

Hahaha. Oh wait, you're serious, let me laugh harder. Bwahahaha!

[Rocky]

Both parties seem to be coming apart at the seams. I think the Democrats are in worse shape than the Republicans, but there are a lot of disenchanted conservatives. Perhaps there are multiple parties in our future.

[pollyannaish]

LOL. Enjoy it. And you may indeed be right.

But remember, she who laughs last, laughs best, beeler.

I'll talk to you in the fall, ok?

[A.Hun]

He was more interested in a political victory then good governance. It still disgusts me.

Hate it for you...it kept Gore out of the Whitehouse. Whatever it costs, it was worth it.

[AmeriBrit]

So the Democrats never did and still don't have a plan huh?????

WRONG!

They've had a plan since the first day GWB was announced as President back in 2001......that plan was to disrupt and tear apart the Republican Party any which way they could, whether it be legal or not....and their plan is working. Just take a long look at the comments in this thread and tell me I'm wrong.

Remember this from a year ago?

http://media1.streamtoyou.com/rnc/0519RNCNo-1.wmv

The Democrats came up with a plan and by George, they've stuck to it, while the party of 'wimps' are letting them get away with it instead of standing up and fighting them with tooth and nail.


Not ONE THING comes to mind that President Bush has attempted to do since first taking the first Oath of Office in 2001, whether it be big or small, hasn't come up against the biggest objections and road blocks of the sore losers on the left with the help of the MSM, the commies, George Soros and 'slick willie', and we've all been caught asleep at the wheel so they've got away with it.

Remember these quotes made by Khrushchev and Gorbachev some twenty odd years ago?

1)
"We can't expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."
-- Nikita Khrushchev

2)
Mikhall Gorbachev: In November 1987, Mr. Gorbachev made the following statements to the Politburo "Gentlemen, comrades, do not be concerned about all you hear about Glasnost and Perestroika and democracy in the coming years. These are primarily for outward consumption. There will be no significant internal change within the Soviet Union, other than for cosmetic purposes. Our purpose is to disarm the Americans and let them fall asleep." (See the following paragraph for more of Mr. Gorbachev's intentions.)
Other organizations have been established in modern history to assist in the establishment of the new world order. The Bilderbergers were formed in 1954, as a sister organization to the CFR and with careful manipulation saw to it that Clinton was elected President. The Club of Rome is using environmental policies, and the unified protection of the worldwide environment as a force moving towards a new world order. This group has divided the world into 10 regions and has placed Mikhail Gorbachev as chairman of the World Environmental Movement from his base in San Francisco.


The Democratic Party is using the old communist propaganda techniques to warp the minds of the people, they are in fact using those very same techniques -- albeit, with a few modern twists and improvements.


Reading their political literature, it is very difficult to tell if the Democratic Party turned Communist or the Communist Party USA joined the Democratic Party. Their platforms and ideals are nearly indistinguishable.


Enter any government officials name and "connections to the KGB" in Google and up pops connections galore so one can only come to one conclusion.....we're puppets to Communism.


A few of the so-called Republicans running for Congress are not a whole lot better than the Democrats. But, they are better. And, as a group, Republicans will be much easier for us to deal with.


It's time we Republican activists ramp-up our activities into high gear. Contact sponsors of offending newspapers and television programs. Use the far-left's style of "in-your-face" tactics, and shout down liberals wherever and whenever you find them. And we must also start actively helping good people run for elected office -- every elected office.


It's time we make more noise. A LOT more noise! Either elected officials and bureaucrats are to support the Constitution, as written, or they are to get the hell out of government. We must not allow anything in-between, and we have to start NOW.

[american spirit]

At least we'd know who we were dealing with instead of these other alleged 'conservatives in name only' (CINO's) who are really socialistic, globaloney 'one worlders' in drag.