Bush's Base Betrayal

The Washington Post ^ | Sunday, May 21, 2006 | Richard A. Viguerie

[gwb43_2004]

As a candidate in 2000, George W. Bush was a Rorschach test. Country Club Republicans saw him as another George H.W. Bush; some conservatives, thinking wishfully, saw him as another Ronald Reagan. He called himself a "compassionate conservative," which meant whatever one wanted it to mean. Experts from across the party's spectrum were flown to Austin to brief Bush and reported back: "He's one of us."

Republicans were desperate to retake the White House, conservatives were desperate to get the Clinton liberals out and there was no direct heir to Reagan running for president. So most conservatives supported Bush as the strongest candidate -- some enthusiastically and some, like me, reluctantly. After the disastrous presidency of his father, our support for the son was a triumph of hope over experience.

[unseen]

I have several close friends, thank you for your concern. However out of the thousands and thousands of people I've met the percentage that I have chosen to call a close friend is small as with most people. I'm sure you are not friends with everyone you ever met. Why because something about that person told you that it was not worth the time to pursue a friendship be it location, financial, character flaws etc. Where they all bad no but only a very few showed that it was worth the effort to form a friendship bond with him/her.

[Richard Kimball]

W has disappointed me on a couple of issues, immigration and border control primarily, but he has done much good. I still hope to be able to shake his hand some day. Few presidents have had to endure the tribulations of office that he has.

[apackof2]

Cheating on a wife doesn't necessarily make a man bad.

Yes it does, it makes him a cheater
And cheaters are good because....

The wife could be dreadful, loathsome, and otherwise a poor mate

So could the husband however marriage and morals have NOTHING to do with situational ethics

All you offer is here potential rationalizations for immorality, aka, cheating/ cheater

[samm1148]

Well said. I was the same way. I read an article about Jeb Bush running in '08 and damn near went through the roof. No more Bush's in the White House--ever again.

Got to wonder what has happened to the Grand Old Party when your choices are Romney (FDR II), Guiliani (say goodbye to your guns and hello to gay teachers teaching your kids) and McCain (First amendment what first amendment?)

[Nuc1]

"I will be voting in 06. For the most conservative person I can find. I will continue to call and write my elected leaders in Congress. However, I will not vote for anyone that has lied to me, that has decreased the national security in return for a short term poll bounce. If faced with that in the ballot box I will leave that person's name blank. I will not give my vote to a liberal but neither will I give it to a person that does not deserve simply because he/she has an r beside it."

Really glad to hear this.

One thing to consider. What has happened recently in the senate has opened many eyes. We have learned much about our overlords but have little time to organize any type of effective action that will help our cause before the 2006 elections. If you have better choices in your state then by all means take them...but do no harm to our cause. If it comes down to a "middle of the road" or liberal dim then vote pubbie even if a RINO is involved.

Following the next election, all of us are going to be targeting RINOS in our respective primaries. We can plan, organize, execute, and achieve. In replacing incumbents there is significant risk of loss. But it is a far more constructive and beneficial for the nation to handle them in this manner than by many of us sitting at home on election night and handing the senate or the house to the dims, regardless of how emotionally satisfying it may be. I can't wait to see the faces of some of the RINOs in 08. Although, many are so old they probably won't run again. I also cannot wait to see the dims faces on election night 06. The dims think that because the pubbies are in trouble then all the people that are mad at the pubbies will vote for them. What silliness. Election night 06 should be a good time. ;)

[HitmanLV]

Not at all.

I was just explaining how a decision to cheat doesn't necessarily make someone a bad person. I do think that cheating has more to do with opportunity & opening than it does with morality.

Almost anyone in the right set of circumstances can cheat.

This is distinct from a chronic cheater, who I do think is loathsome.

[AmeriBrit]

My screen name should give you a clue, plus being married to someone who spent over 36 years active service before retiring we have been to and lived in too many countries all over the world for me to count off the bat.

[iluvgeorgie]

"I hope Bush's approval goes to zero."

As long as I'm breathing, that will never happen.

[unseen]

oh yeah Mexico is a superpower. please.

[FreedomPoster]

While there is no doubt we'd like a more conservative President, there is also no doubt that the Old Media is doing all they can to foment division on the right.

Pay attention to this, people.

[FreedomPoster]

I remind you of Perot and the result in 1996.

[apackof2]

Almost anyone in the right set of circumstances can cheat.

Please don't generalize

Not "almost everyone" does

That's just another rationalization so the cheater doersn't have to take resposibility for an immoral act, cheating. i.e. "After all I am not doing anything that almost everyone else doesn't do under the right" circumstance" etc.

"I'll just tell this little lie, after all "almost everyone does" and on and on and on under a million different "circumstances"

Morals are decisions that you choose to stick by regardless of the circumstances

[unseen]

luckily both my senators (dole and Burr) are not up for reelection so that's a choice I will not have to make.

[AmeriBrit]

I would prefer to tread softly with the southern border situation until as I previously said we could handle it properly with the necessary backup. I do not want anymore parents to have to go through what my family has suffered because of quick unnecessary judgements and making things worse and having every country south of the border involved in a war against us.

[AmeriBrit]

So you think it would be just Mexico? Grow up.

[unseen]

I had several chances to cheat. I turned them all down at the time and went home to my wife and kids. Being in my kids lives full time was worth more then anything the lady had between her legs.

[HitmanLV]

I didn't say almost everyone does in fact cheat.

I said almost anyone in the right circumstances can cheat.

Big difference.

And I'm not saying its ok. I'd leave a spouse that cheated on me. I'm just saying that succumbing to temptation doesn't inexorably make them a bad person, that's all.

[org.whodat]

Go on and vote for a wife cheater, or waste your vote on a third party! That is really going to solve all of your problems

I think his statement was a joke, there is noway newt could get elected to anything, he'd be to busy whining about where he set on the plane.

[BW2221]

Something under $400 million. Something less than the population of a small town or good size military bese would earn in a year.

I agree that it should be based on a company's performance. Usually competition is involved, except in industries like oil and utilities, where the parties simply agree to divide the pie.

Compare Raymond to Rick Wagner at GM. ExxonMobil sales and profits grew tremendously as Exxon acquired Mobil and prices went through the roof. Raymond basically was in the right place at the right time. It will take a minor miracle for Wagner to bring GM back because he is facing tremendous competition (primarily import), has tremendous "legacy" costs that put GM at a $1,500 per unit disadvantage against Toyota, currency exchange rates, the UAW, etc. Talk about having a deck stacked against you.

Also, it's important to remember that most of the members of the ExxonMobil board were appointed by Raymond.

If you don't grasp the significance of the military example, the parachute is the equivalent of a 10 cent surcharge on four BILLION gallons of gas.

[HitmanLV]

I agree with you 100%. That's not inconsistent with what I am saying, though.