Posted on 04/10/2006 8:45:19 PM PDT by rodeocowboy
Is Bush's Second Term Becoming a 'Harriet Miers Presidency'? by Jerome R. Corsi Posted Apr 07, 2006
Watching the immigration bill charade unfold in the Senate, many conservatives have begun to wonder if President Bush left his political compass back at Crawford?
Conservatives were very happy with Bush right through his second inaugural. But the Harriet Miers nomination was a shocker. There was so much conservative backlash that Miers had to withdraw her nomination. But, we were only some three months into the second term, and anybody can have a “Harriet Miers Moment,” trying too hard to thank a friend.
Then there was the State of the Union speech. There President Bush went “green” on energy, mouthing a line better than the political left or the radical environmentalists could make up, saying that America is “addicted to oil.” Wasn’t Bush an oil company executive once?
Someone should remind Karl Rove that conservatives like to drill for oil. What ever happened to the proposal drill in ANWR? Again, conservatives couldn’t believe what they were hearing. Was the Bush Administration’s solution to America’s dependency on foreign oil really going to be wood chips and switch grass? Bio-fuels were always a Democratic argument. What happened?
Then, the Dubai ports deal accomplished something most conservatives thought impossible. Defending Dubai, the President actually lost his ground on his major strength, the War on Terrorism. Bush actually allowed the Democrats to posture as hawks on the national security issue. Conservatives were beginning to get numb with shock.
Now, Bush is praising Senate Republicans for working with Teddy Kennedy and Harry Reid on the immigration bill. G. Gordon Liddy is right when he says the Senate “just sold America out to Mexico.” Bush and Sen. John McCain will probably never understand that for most true conservatives a “guest worker” program is just amnesty in disguise. Conservatives care about securing the border. For conservatives, “guest workers” are still illegal aliens. For conservatives, the illegal immigration threat is about national security, not NAFTA.
A strong conservative base voted for Bush’s re-election in November 2004. The President has made a series of decisions that suggest he wants to move more to the center, something the conservative base does not view with favor. Or maybe, as many have speculated, Bush is truly a CINO (Conservative in Name Only).
Still, there is one more explanation. Maybe Bush has decided to work secretly for the election of Hillary Clinton as President in 2008. Since the 2004 election, Bush has gone out of his way several times to talk warmly about President Bill Clinton’s budding friendship with his father, Bush 41. Surely the President realizes that most conservatives still cringe at the mention of Bill Clinton’s name.
But maybe the plan is to establish a Bush-Clinton dynasty? First Bush 41, followed by William Jefferson Clinton, followed by Bush 43, followed by Hillary Rodham Clinton -- that’s how the dynasty idea would go. From there, probably we are supposed to return to Jeb Bush, to be followed by Chelsea.
If that’s the plan, forget it. For most conservatives, even the mention of Hillary’s name is like the sound of scraping your fingernails on a blackboard. Conservatives might someday buy Jeb, but Chelsea? Probably never.
A “Harriet Miers Presidency” in which George W. Bush abandons his conservative base is a very bad idea.
If Karl Rove thinks the Republican Party will gain by pandering to all those illegal immigrants, maybe he should first worry about how many conservatives he is going to alienate in the process.
Right now, the 2006 midterm congressional elections are shaping up to be a major Republican Party setback. Maybe that will kill any thought that a “Harriet Miers Presidency” move-to-the-center is a good idea. It isn’t. Passing this immigration bill is probably a 2006 death wish for at least three or four Republican senators we can identify without thinking too hard.
Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along with John O'Neill), "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), and "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians." He is a frequent guest on the G. Gordon Liddy radio show. He will soon co-author a new book with Jim Gilchrist on the Minuteman Project.
look out the sky is falling.
This article is pretty accurate as far as I can tell.
The lib was wrong on the oil issue though. I am totally for getting us weaned off the tit of middle eastern oil. If that means drilling in ANWR, so be it. But, I would rather be growing corn for our energy as Brazil does. Call it "green" if they want, but I call it national security.
"Conservatives might someday buy Jeb..."
I think the whole "conspiracy theory in this article is right out of Bellevue Hospital. But let me say this, Jeb Bush's political ambitions were ended this week. Along with his son's.
Bush tried to sneak a liberal, Harriet Myers, onto the Supreme Court. No other evidence is necessary to prove that Bush is a closet New England liberal.
Go to google.com and type in rodeocowboy. Then you will see all of the blood, sweat, and tears I have put in for Bush. Bush abandoned us; I'm tired of abandoning my principles and making up talking points to defend him. I can't wait until he goes. He abondoned conservatives; he's the "pseudo conservative." Good riddance to Bush and his brother, my Governor.
Actually, Myers was an unknown to conservatives. She may have been a conservative SCOTUS judge.
While I realize this piece is not the Gettysburg Address, and the world will indeed not long remember it --- I take exception to using Harriet Miers' name in this fashion. She wasn't your idea or mine of a Sup Ct nominee, but she took a bullet for her boss in the process, and she took it in time to spare him, herself and all of us a good measure of unpleasantness. Not to mention that she has been an able lawyer and a loyal friend to the President. You want to call him a lame duck, or worse, go ahead and make your case; but she doesn't deserve to see her name used to cut her President down.
If you want the 2009 full Amnesty will voting rights to all Illegals the next day bill, then by all means keep pushing this DNC "Virtual Campaigner" garbage about "no difference between Repbs and Demos"
I didn't mind Harriet Miers, I don't have any problem with green energy, and I don't mind drilling for oil.
I'm a conservative....that means that I look to preserve valuable practices, beliefs, processes, items, etc.
It also means that I'll accept new practices, beliefs, processes, items, etc., that are also demonstrated to be positive.
Yeah activly helping your political enemies PR lines makes you either their dup or their ally. Squeal all you want that is simple reality.
I didn't know Corsi was a lib. Except for the excellent judicial nominees and WOT the President's domestic agenga has been liberal.
The problem is that all Republicans, upon becoming President, become more liberal. Does anyone believe that President McCain or President Frist would be in favor of a strict immigration bill? Even Reagan signed an amnesty.
Like most too good to be true stories, "green fuels" are a starting point, not a silver bullet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel#Net_fuel_energy_balance
Net fuel energy balance
For ethanol to contribute significantly to transportation fuel needs, it would need to have a positive net energy balance. To evaluate the net energy of ethanol four variables must be considered: the amount of energy contained in the final ethanol product, the amount of energy directly consumed to make the ethanol (such as the diesel used in tractors), the quality of the resulting ethanol compared to the quality of refined gasoline and the energy indirectly consumed (in order to make the ethanol processing plant, etc). Although a topic of debate, some research that ignores energy quality suggests it takes as much or more fossil fuel energy (in the forms of diesel, natural gas and coal) to create an equivalent amount of energy in the form of ethanol. In other words, the energy needed to run the tractors, produce the fertilizer, process the ethanol, and the energy associated with the wear and tear on all of the equipment used in the process (known as fixed asset depreciation to economists) may be more than the energy derived from burning ethanol.
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.