Don't forget the Michael Savage lowbrows.
Pat Buchanan also considers himself a Conservative who knows better than Bush.
Everybody knows what is gong to happen, but nobody wants to talk about it...We're going to be hit again by terrorists who infiltrate across our southern border. Bush is more concerned about offending foreigners (dubai, China, Mexico, Pakistan...) than protecting this country.
I was disgusted with Clinton, "wagging the dog" and all...but the first attack on the WTC ultimately failed. Bush's neglect is post 9-11, and given that, leaving the border undefended, approving UAE involvement in port security, letting China run the inspections of our container ships Etc, Etc, Etc is worse than anything Clinton did IMO.
Bush should know better. He has destroyed the party, and this next election will be the proof.
He has left us vulnerable through our southern border, and the next attack will be proof.
"The Paul Mulshine Conservative is the reason for President Bush's low polling numbers."
If Mulshine is a Conservative, I am Betty Grable.
He has been writing anti Bush articles for the last six years. Him and John Farmer are two of the biggest DNC water bucket carriers that the Drive By Media have.
Hey, when Bush is wrong, he's wrong. He's no conservative. Goldwater and Reagan would both disown him.
There's Kool-Aid drinking in BOTH parties right now.
It's true that Bush isn't a true conservative. Sure, he's a social conservative but not a fiscal one. What ever happened to limited government. The funny thing is that we all knew he'd increase government involvement in our lives via increased spending but we didn't care because we didn't want Al Whore as president. Where is Ronald Reagan when you need him?
Heaven knows, I have my problems with Bush, especially on his allowing the alien invasion from Mexico to go on.
But what were the alternatives - Ozone alGore or traitorous John Kerry???? Both would open the borders full bore and give illegals more rights that real Americans. and both would have increased taxes AND spending.
Until there's a better alternative to Bush that is FEASIBLE, conservatives have to settle for the half-a-loaf we get judicial appointments, tax cuts, etc.
Ronald Reagan built up the military.
George Bush is rebuilding the military.
Ronald Reagan defeated the Soviet Union.
George Bush is defeating al Qaeda.
Ronald Reagan cut taxes.
George Bush cut taxes.
Ronald Reagan failed to cut spending.
George Bush failed to cut spending.
Ronald Reagan offered amnesty to illegals.
George Bush is offering guest worker programs for illegals.
Ronald Reagan was charged by Democrats with abuse of power and lying.
George Bush has been charged by Democrats with abuse of power and lying.
Ronald Reagan called on God for help.
George Bush has called on God for help.
Yeah...I see what you mean. Wow! What a difference.
I've heard people like him referred to as Donner Party Conservatives. They always eat their own.
Since when is a countries citizenry demanding a secure border a partisan issue? This is insane talk. It's simple, Bush is not doing his constitutional job.
Bump! I know you like lively threads!
Hey, I happen to LIKE Beau and Jeff Bridges!
I guess with Gore or Kerry as prez, Hussein and the Taliban wouldn't be in power, Gaddhafy would still have ceased his wmd production, we'd still have tax cuts, and the Supreme Court and other federal judicial nominees would still be conservative. Rather than complain about legitimate gripes about what Bush has done, these "conservative" Bush-haters dismiss everything positive he's done.
Interesting article that deserves a response.
Bush has been, in my mind, a very good President. I'd rate him second-best after Reagan in my lifetime and would argue against any who say otherwise.
But Bush has not been a very good conservative.
His 'compassionate conservative' is another way of saying he's a sometimes conservative who is more than happy to stray off the reservation when he feels like it, especially on fiscal matters.
And therein lies the rub.
yYu can cite numerous cases where Bush should or could have been more conservative. But you can also cite cases where Bush has done things the right way - From Chief Justice Roberts to significant tax cuts to an energy bill that finally after 20 years will let us build nuclear power plants again.
Bush, for all the tons of ink the New York Times has spilled to blacken his name on Iraq and the war on terror, has pursued it exactly as he promised in the days after 9/11, and has done his best under difficult circumstances and with critics who are in many cases hypocrites, liars and frauds (from Ray McGovern and Cindy Sheehan extremists to the political machinations of Biden, Hillary and Howard Dean). Much of his political baggage is the reality of the DIFFICULTY AND DANGERS OF WAR ITSELF. He is given 100% of the blame but none of the credit for navigating through these difficulties.
Bush's lack of adherence to conservative orthodoxy makes him a maddening figure to some on the right ... especially the trust-nobody paleo-con types who abhor his nation-building efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and think Dubai Ports World is a terrorist front organization.
Politics at its best is the politics of addition - groups with different views come together for common goals ... at worst, it is substraction, where the Bush coalition is peeled away by groups griping that their views arent heard, forgetting of all they got from the coalition.
Some leader will have to put humpty-dumpty back together again, or there will be a conservative crack-up. After the crack-up will come wilderness years, and to see that so soon after we hit the Trifecta in 2004 ... GOP House, GOP Senate, GOP President elected ... is a travesty and a tragedy.
For that political blunder, to come so low after being so high - yes, we can partly blame Bush.
Bush has had a tin ear for years to key conservative issues - the Harriet Miers fiasco and his continued failure to grasp political realities on immigration being the two most salient... but Bush was also the one who forced, yes, forced conservative Congressmen to vote for the prescription drug package, a deal that looked wrong even when it was being voted on, and looks like bad politics and bad policy now. It can be said that every attempt made by Bush to 'triangulate' to the middle has been a political mistake. The best he did was NCLB - No Child Left Behind - which gave him 'credit' for advancing standards in education, but satisfied no educator, with them whining about 'unfunded' programs, even though Dept of Ed spending ballooned.
It took Bush to actually make liberals dislike the Dept of Education and be for states rights! Amazing! All from a bill that was a 'bipartisan compromise' with Kennedy.
Let's make a simple rule: If Kennedy is a co-sponsor, it's a bad bad bill!
Why can't Bush veto stuff... not everything but just, say, prok barrel 'bridge to nowhere' funding, or that egregious McCain-Feingold campaign regulation bill, that Bush himself stated he opposed.
But Conservatives, we have to blame ourselves too.
Can we stand by principle and our President at the same time? Can recognize the wheat from the chaff, the important from the trivial? Can we stop ourselve from the madness of groupthink and hyperbole? (After the Dubai ports world, I think not).
"I have met the enemy, and it is us!"
I can't stand Bush because he won't return my phone calls.
Correct. But they aren't going to vote Democrat, so they can put the champaign away.
I'm surprised Mulshine hasn't lost his job. He is a real jerk, and rude to his readers.