Posted on 03/08/2006 7:08:13 AM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
It shows.
Indeed. What they lack through ignorance they make up for with arrogance.
Reagan was "the 80s" conservatism- it's little wonder you think we should "get past that". The GOP insiders tried to keep Reagan from getting the nomination in '76 and '80- I guess you missed that since Sesame Street was more interesting to you at the time. Well we are "past" the '80s, and the GOP has returned to what it was before Reagan- a "me too" version of the Democrat agenda.
Hahaha. Oh wait, you're serious, let me laugh harder. Bwahahaha!
Which federal programs have the Republicans been in favor of eliminating?
As Cleceau would say, "Good One!"
Frankly, we need to be looking at the Ports 'hiring practices' a lot more closely nowadays, and disregard that "green color."
Your theory may not hold up based on some disconcerting facts which are now surfacing:
Please do not take this as a personal slam, but rather as an honest question. Are you employed by the GOP?
"Which federal programs have the Republicans been in favor of eliminating?"
Give me a decade or so, I'll think of one:-)
"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/"
I voted for Bush both times. I had no other choice and I knew what we were getting. The apple never falls far from the tree........"Read my lips, NO NEW TAXES."
The GOP has lost my support until they bring forth a true Conservative.
>Please do not take this as a personal slam, but rather as an honest question. Are you employed by the GOP?
Nope. I volunteer for campaigns. I do so to prevent the liberal Democrat agenda from enshrouding my life. I travel to states away from where I live to do so and pay my own plane ticket and hotel and rental car costs.
Winning matters. Losing never, ever has any benefit in a world where incumbency has such power. Most of those advocating defeat on the premise that it will teach the populace or the party a lesson to have to endure the opposition, are themselves opposition activists. Those few that are not are not informed about the power of incumbency.
Do what you can for GOP candidates in vulnerable districts.
"Real conservatives" as defined by you.
I'm aware of the traditional definition used for the last 60 to 70 years or so, if you are not, just get youself a history book.
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.