Bush Fears For Nation’s Soul; Peggy Noonan Fears For Bush’s Soul

Political Mavens/Jewish World Review ^ | June 4, 2007

[theothercheek]

In an interview aboard Air Force One last week with Ron Hutcheson of McClatchy Newspapers, President Bush said:

"I'm deeply concerned about America losing its soul. Immigration has been the lifeblood of a lot of our country's history. And I am worried that a backlash to newcomers would cause our country to lose its great capacity to assimilate newcomers. And I believe that a newly arrived adds to the vigor and the entrepreneurial spirit, and enhances the American Dream."

These sentiments, coupled with Bush’s suggestion that opponents of his compromised immigration compromise "don't want to do what's right for America," are driving conservatives to apoplexy. The Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan contends that Bush broke faith with conservatives, not the other way around:

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. …

You don't like endless gushing spending … 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."

Noonan makes the case that it’s déjà vu all over again:

[T]he Bushes, father and son … are great wasters of political inheritance. They throw it away as if they'd earned it and could do with it what they liked. Bush senior inherited a vibrant country and a party at peace with itself. … Mr. Bush won in 1988 by saying he would govern as Reagan had. … [H]e raised taxes, sundered a hard-won coalition, and found himself shocked to lose his party the presidency, and for eight long and consequential years. ….

Bush the younger came forward, presented himself as a conservative, garnered all the frustrated hopes of his party, turned them into victory, and not nine months later was handed a historical trauma that left his country rallied around him, lifting him, and his party bonded to him. He was disciplined and often daring, but in time he sundered the party that rallied to him, and broke his coalition into pieces. …

There’s only one thing conservatives and Republicans can do now, says Noonan: “[W]in back their party.” She adds that “breaking from those who have already broken from [you]” and “letting go … will be painful, but it's time. It's more than time.”

The question is, how?

Deep down – maybe not so deep down – conservatives always knew Bush was a pretender, mouthing the right words and making the right gestures. But conservatives voted for him anyway, the first time to pre-empt a third Clinton term and the second time because the thought of Kerry as a post-9/11 Commander in Chief was nightmare-inducing.

This was a shot-gun wedding and after eight years of Bush, conservatives are understandably gun-shy. But holding out for an imaginary ideal of ideological purity is not the answer. And allowing Hillary Clinton to capture the White House by staying home on Election Day is not an option.

There may be a third way: A new conservative coalition that crosses party lines to include anyone who considers himself center-right. Such a coalition could as easily support a conservative Republican as a “Blue Dog” Democrat. Since neither party would be able to count on the bipartisan bloc’s vote, both will court these voters and neither will take them for granted. As an added benefit, the sheer size of this bipartisan bloc may be an equal and opposing force against the inexorable leftward pull the moonbats are exerting on the Dem party platform.

Of the 19 declared presidential candidates as of this writing, Rudy Giuliani is the most logical choice to forge this new coalition of conservatives. He is enough of a social liberal to attract Reagan Democrats, and tough enough on crime and terrorism – with the added bonus of being fiscally conservative – to attract conservatives who are putting social issue on the back burner this time around.

Over the next 18 months, several home-grown Muslim terror plots are likely to come to light - such as the thwarted plan to blow up aviation fuel tanks and feeder lines running underground from New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport through surrounding residential neighborhoods in Queens. Each time, more social conservatives will conclude that preventing the aborting of the lives of those already born in acts of terrorism is at least as important as preventing the aborting of unborn babies.

[deport]

I know that it wasn’t her statement and neither did I assert it was. I only said if’n she jumps on that bandwagon not that she has.....

[TommyDale]

I fully understand what I read. Thanks anyway.

[Sloth]

Your life and the lives of your already born children are as important as the life of an unborn child. You disagree with that? An innocent life is an innocent life and losing innocent life to terrorism is as bad as losing innocent life to abortion.

I agree completely.

Right now, we are need to worry about an unkowable number of Muslims living in the US (the recent Pew poll suggested at least 600,000) who think it’s OK to commit acts of terrorism against innocent civilians - that would be me, you and your family. Call me stupid, or a bad conservative, or whatever you want, but to me that is Issue Number One.

Then you are really crappy at math. Until the terrorists demonstrate an ability to actually kill large numbers of people, the magnitude of abortion dwarfs terrorism. In 2001, the Al Qaeda terrorists managed to kill about 3,000 Americans. Since then, the Planned Parenthood terrorists have managed to kill roughly 9,000,000, a factor of three thousand larger. Would Al Qaeda like to kill that many? Sure. And when we have any reason to think that they are about to get a nuke over here, they can take priority. But so far they appear to just be a bunch of flea-ridden camel humpers stuck in the Dark Ages. And given your assertion that "losing innocent life to terrorism is as bad as losing innocent life to abortion", we'd have to conclude that abortion is the much greater priority.

Secondly, as I indicated earlier, it's a false choice. The fact that, say, a Presidential administration is pro-life in no way means that it is soft on terrorism, or vice-versa.

[Mamzelle]

I think he’s saying, “talk to the hand.”

[theothercheek]

Don’t you just love it when people don’t read stuff and then jump to conclusions? The idea of conservatives divorcing the Republican party - but not voting for an independent candidate - is something that needs serious conhsideration - even if you don’t think Rudy is the one to build the bridge to moderate and conservative Dems to form a new coalition. I wish people would read something from start to finish before responding. To me, the real questions are: Is it feasible to create a new coalition that is not tied to either political party (everybody stays registered with whatever party they are already registered)? Of the 19 people running for president today, who has enough bipartisan appeal to build this bridge between Republican conservatives who are tired of being taken for granted and Dem conservatives who are tired of being marginalized? Let’s really discuss these questions and see if we can figure out something better than staying home on election day.

[theothercheek]

LOL.

[NordP]

"We're not assimilating them. They are an alien presence."

They are a bona fide invasion.

[dforest]

I think the problem will get corrected and there will be no need to stay home. However it needs to be done with honesty and integrity.

Conservatives and Republicans are not your uninformed, sound bite, promise me a handout, Democrat.

The GOP needs to keep that in mind.

[Jonathon Spectre]

It's not that the President thinks we're stupid.

It's that he doesn't think of us, or care about us or our wishes, at all, and never has, and never will. The only people the President is interested in are those who got him where he is.

Those people want servants, and so the importation of a permanant underclass of slaves must not cease, and if it takes seeing the last retarded 28% of people who still support his disastrous, incompetent government abandon him to make this certain, then that is what will happen.

I can't wait to see the President's approval ratings after this utter debacle. I think single digits is a possibility.

[Badeye]

‘How do you think it will play out on the Dem side?’

Short version? Gore rides to the rescue, and gets his ass kicked.

Long version;

Hillary Clinton is facing quite a few political problems. Chief among them is the ‘enough with Clinton’s or Bush’s in the Whitehouse’. But it goes much further than that.

Senators historically have a hard time winning the Whitehouse. Northeast liberalism is decaying as a valid political position - which is why the MSM keeps pretending Clinton is a ‘centrist’ when actually she’s a far leftwing socialist.

Next up, a woman winning a national election cycle. Liberal females are still confused as to why their choice for France’s recent election cycle didn’t receive the majority of female votes. It didn’t surprise me, I know women can actually think for themselves....(chuckle)...I wish more politicians understood that. ‘Gender politics’ is a myth, in short, as each election cycle demonstates. Women make up 51% of the entire population of this country last time I checked, and as we know they are a small minority of elected office holders. They don’t vote based on gender.

Then there is the problem unique to Hillary Clinton. Every time she opens her mouth, her ‘negative numbers’ rise accordingly. Given where she’s at nationally, with around 45% saying they won’t vote for her ‘under any circumstances’ I don’t see how she has a realistic chance of winning, either the primary or a general election cycle. Democrats know this, just as they knew Howard Dean couldn’t win, no matter how loud the ‘internuts’ screeched.

While Democrats are usually wrong on every political issue you might mention, they want to win. They don’t believe she can win a general election cycle. Thats HUGE in this theory of mine, btw.

After this, then consider Clinton’s now renowned ‘political tin ear’. You can ‘scrip it away’ most of the time, but not during debates, as she keeps demonstrating.

When pressured, she SCREECHES. Thats not a smear about gender, its a valid observation over the years. ‘I’m sick and tired!!!!” doesn’t fly with voters when its stated at decibels using known for jackhammers and jet take offs.

Its been my opinion for the past two or three years she won’t even be in the primaries when the time comes, she’ll come up with some weird reason or other to ‘withdraw at this time’.

We’ll see.

Meanwhile, if I’m correct, many have wasted time and effort getting worked up to fight another Clinton Whitehouse....and as such, haven’t spent enough time on whoever the real nominee will be.

[RightWhale]

The Pres is thinking historically. Problem is, nobody of importance has ever predicted or created the future he envisioned by studying history. These Progressives, which is what the Pres is, attempt to guide societal evolution and have never actually guided societal evolution.

[subterfuge]

Over the next 18 months, several home-grown Muslim terror plots are likely to come to light - such as the thwarted plan to blow up aviation fuel tanks and feeder lines running underground from New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport through surrounding residential neighborhoods in Queens. Each time, more social conservatives will conclude that preventing the aborting of the lives of those already born in acts of terrorism is at least as important as preventing the aborting of unborn babies.

I'd like to think so, but I don't. With a few swipes of their pens, the liberal media just wishes the attacks away. Usually intoning that it's A) either a conspiracy by the conservative republicans to generate "fear", or B) it isn't "really" happening at all (terrorism).

[AmericanMade1776]

Some of you have a short term memory, you forgot what President Bush stepped forward to save you all from. Had President George W. Bush not been your President on Sept 11, 2001, we would of had leadership by the Alpha Male Gore , who had to consult a manuel to see how to dress. Had President Bush not fought hard again in 2004 you would of had the Traitor John Kerry as your leader. Someone who believes that Lindsay Lohan could be President of the United States, and that only the stupid become military.

[Diogenesis]

Licorice: "Protect the Border, Mr. President."

[AmericanMade1776]

Thank you for that picture of Licorice, still just as adorable as ever. I knew you would not forget the fight! This time I am going to save that picture of Licorice

[rodeo-mamma]

You are right about G not winning the nomination, I just don’t understand your blind spot about Hillary? Don’t you know the Democratic Party worships the ground she walks on? Don’t forget about voter fraud, you can’t put anything past these people.

[jacknhoo]

“An innocent life is an innocent life and losing innocent life to terrorism is as bad as losing innocent life to abortion.”

Are you saying and eye for an eye?

1.5 million children a year vs a little over 3000 in six years? But the 3000 is you number one issue?

Sounds awfully suspicious to me.

[Badeye]

‘You are right about G not winning the nomination, I just don’t understand your blind spot about Hillary? Don’t you know the Democratic Party worships the ground she walks on? Don’t forget about voter fraud, you can’t put anything past these people.’

You misunderstand, I think Gore will in fact win the nomination.

The Democratic Party doesn’t ‘worship Hillary Clinton’ at all, even her own internal polling numbers bear that out.

I don’t think you appreciate just how much anomosity the Clinton’s built up during the Impeached One’s eight years in office. They are arrogant, she more than he, and it hasn’t been forgotten.

If she was ‘loved’ by the Democratic Party, she’d have 50% of the votes in poll after poll of registered Democrats. Obama, lightweight that he is, is giving her a run...and as he demonstrated last night, he can’t even recall basic facts accurately (10k dead from a tornado recently, for just one example).

The average Democrat isn’t an enamoured of Hillary Clinton as you seem to think, in short. And the polling data backs it up.

[theothercheek]

So you have a crystal ball and know for sure that there won’t be other terrorist acts committed on our soil, or someone won’t detonate a dirty bomb or Iran won’t nuke us. You can look decades into the future and know this. I envy you. I can only look at the here and now and the threats we are facing.

[theothercheek]

The fact that an untested, done nothing yet rookie like Obama is giving Hillary a run for the money does suggest that she is not invincible. If Gore gets in, I agree that he runs away with the nomination.