Peggy Noonan and The WSJ Editorial - It's Time to Revolt!

Red State ^ | June 1, 2007

[Clintonfatigued]

However, now I do not feel alone. Peggy Noonan has a new column up in the Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal. She has clearly said what has been getting me down. I think I knew what was up, but couldn't put a finger on it. I knew it centered around the immigration debate, and the way our congressional leaders are behaving. That sentiment especially includes Mr. Bush too, but when I read this column, I felt like Charlie Brown yelling at Lucy at her Psychology booth when he yells, "That's it!" when trying to identify why he can't get into the Christmas spirit.

Try this clip on for size :

The White House doesn't need its traditional supporters anymore, because its problems are way beyond being solved by the base. And the people in the administration don't even much like the base. Desperate straits have left them liberated, and they are acting out their disdain. Leading Democrats often think their base is slightly mad but at least their heart is in the right place. This White House thinks its base is stupid and that its heart is in the wrong place.

For almost three years, arguably longer, conservative Bush supporters have felt like sufferers of battered wife syndrome. You don't like endless gushing spending, the kind that assumes a high and unstoppable affluence will always exist, and the tax receipts will always flow in? Too bad! You don't like expanding governmental authority and power? Too bad. You think the war was wrong or is wrong? Too bad.

But on immigration it has changed from "Too bad" to "You're bad."

The president has taken to suggesting that opponents of his immigration bill are unpatriotic--they "don't want to do what's right for America." His ally Sen. Lindsey Graham has said,

[jrooney]

Since Newt failed to act on the borders and immigration when he was the speaker from 94 to 98 with a solidly conservative majority, he should STFU. He has as much credibility with illegal immigration as Clinton with terrorism. Both were too busy chasing skirts instead of dealing with and solving these major problems.

[Radix]

This Immigration Bill is a bad idea.

It serves no true good purpose. Unless of course you are an illegal immigrant.

That is not a reason to hate President Bush, or illegal immigrants.

I’ve read as much as I have had time to read, and I have perused this entire thread (almost 400 posts)as well as others.

I am confounded at just what part of the word “illegal” is not being comprehended here.

Where is the logic in ignoring Laws that were designed to protect us in so many diverse ways?

[Iwo Jima]

It's long been a puzzle to me why this administration hasn't groomed a VP to run for the presidency in '08.

Because it has been ordained by the powers that be that the Democrat party will now be in ascendancy -- Dem president, Congress, etc.

Bush just does as he is told. In 2006 he delivered Congress to the Dems as he was told to do, and in 2008 will deliver the presidency to them.

[RightWhale]

Lots of people, including opinion-makers, are in a state of confusion. The model isn’t working anymore. Possibly it only seemed to be working before.

[ckilmer]

Since Newt failed to act on the borders and immigration when he was the speaker from 94 to 98 with a solidly conservative majority, he should STFU. He has as much credibility with illegal immigration as Clinton with terrorism. Both were too busy chasing skirts instead of dealing with and solving these major problems.
/////////////////
nah.

they’re numbers were growing but illegals were still a blip in the 90’s. the republicans controlled California until 94 or so. They’re numbers have accelerated since Jorge came to office because he’s been promising amnesty steadily and steadily reduced enforcement at the border and in the workplace.

[Iwo Jima]

I can’t name a “conservatively advisor to Pres Bush.” Can you?

[jrooney]

Newt the other day was hammering GW for immigration. I will not allow him to rewrite history or sit back and let people defend him either. He had his opportunity and it was not a priority for Newt or most freepers here because this issue was not even a blip on the screen. This issue should have been handled in the 90’s when we had the first conservative majority in Congress in 40 years. That was the time to do it or from 2002 to 2006 when we controlled Congress. There is no defending Newt on this issue. He kicked the can down the road for someone else to deal with, like Clinton did with terrorism. Newt FAILED, like Clinton FAILED. Now GW needs to deal with both. I am no fan of the current bill but I am a realist about the type of bill that will pass Pelosi and Reid.

[cgbg]

Bush does have a strategic plan--for himself and his big money supporters.

Probably his post-Presidency activities will be a cross between Jerry Ford's "golf around the world" tour and Jimmy Carter's Quisling World Tour.

Meanwhile our tax dollars will get to protect him from his former supporters.

;-)

[jrooney]

"Meanwhile our tax dollars will get to protect him from his former supporters."

Why, what are you advocating? Stupid post that makes you and FR look bad and could cause someone to ask do you have ill intentions to cause the POTUS harm?

[Iwo Jima]

I still can’t buy that W wants Hillary to follow his administration.

Because they are working for the same goal -- one world government.

The powers that be pushed for OWG though the Democratic party for years. Then the Republican party was selected as the vehicle for OWG. Now it's the Democrats turn.

This way, when the people get fed up and scream for a change, they get it. Of course, it's just a change in name only, the basic objectives stay the same: Destroy America and usher in the New World Order.

Read "Compromised" by Terry Read.

[LibKill]

OK. He did not use the word "unpatriotic". The words he did use mean much the same thing.

I deeply resent his backstabbing the conservative base on this issue. I'm glad he can't have a third term. He does not deserve one.

[Iwo Jima]

It only seems like incompetence because you don't appreciate his true objectives. He is very competently weakening America and furthering one world government.

Things are much simpler when you assume that people intend to do what they are obviously doing.

[Iwo Jima]

That is a great article! Must read!

[claudiustg]

Here’s what the President said:

“If you want to kill the bill, if you don’t want to do what’s right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it, you can use it to frighten people.”

[Iwo Jima]

Without loyalty, you have no honor.

If you have no loyalty to America,you have no honor.

[Clintonfatigued]

There’s a certain primary in South Carolina that comes to mind for me.

[cgbg]

I am not advocating anything or implying anything about Freepers or anyone else.

I am observing that the Pubbies and W have gotten a hostile reaction from their base on the immigration (and other issues) and that they probably would assume that there might be some kooks out there that would be cause for concern.

People who are betrayed tend to get a bit hostile--no matter what the circumstance might be.

I am a pen and not a sword guy myself who dosen't even own a weapon and flunked riflery at day camp as a youth.

[AFPhys]

I’ll just reiterate that I believe that post#371 has it right: That in the President’s view this bill is vital for America, to kill it would be bad for America, and please, people, don’t find some part of it so objectionable that you kill the bill... That if you can propose a way to better it, go ahead, but he’s asking don’t just kill it to kill it, as he believes it is the only good approach.

As I’ve said elsewhere, I disagree with that as do you, but I believe that the talking heads have managed to twist what he said to something he didn’t mean: that we’re unpatriotic if we disagree with this approach.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1843247/posts?page=13#13
I believe we need several smaller, more comprehensible steps first (I forgot “stop anchor babies” in that post), and only after that should we proceed.