Conservatives Shouldn't Abandon Bush

Townhall.com ^ | July 13, 2007 | Mike Gallagher

[Kaslin]

Watching a steady stream of Democrats like Harry Reid, Dick Durbin, and Chuck Schumer each take their turn delightedly pummeling President Bush over the war in Iraq today, I couldn’t help but think of fellow conservatives who are starting to give aid and comfort to these Democrat Party loyal oppositionists.

According to Byron York of the National Review, the Republican Party base has simply decided to throw Mr. Bush under the wheels of the bus. Since so many of us disagree with him on things like illegal immigration and Scooter Libby, York opines that a whole bunch of Republican loyalists are practically counting the days until Jan. 20, 2009, when a new commander-in-chief takes up residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Other conservative voices are jumping on the Bush-bashing bandwagon. The other night on Fox News, I saw a radio host proclaim that the president’s soft stance on illegals has cost him support for the war in Iraq.

Just what, precisely, is the point?

Why do conservatives believe that trashing the Bush Administration’s efforts on everything from this complicated war to a commutation of a vice-presidential aide will accomplish anything but give Democrats more ammunition against the GOP in 2008

Look, I’m as disappointed in this administration’s attempted amnesty for illegals as anyone. But I looked President Bush in the eye in the Oval Office and saw a man who truly believes in his heart that giving illegals a “path to citizenship” is the right thing to do.

I believe he’s wrong. But I know that this good and decent man believes he’s right.

So because of this issue, I’m supposed to abandon my president?

I’m expected to go on radio and TV and give miserable attack dogs like Dick Durbin more ways to say, “See -- even Republican supporters of Bush are defecting!”?

From the day the bombs started dropping on Baghdad, President Bush kept telling us that nothing about this war would be easy. Our nation has never attempted something as bold as installing democracy in this troubled part of the world and attempting to make a country like Iraq stable enough so that they can handle their own terrorists without our intervention.

Simply put, the vast majority of Americans supported our country’s pre-emptive strike. The longer this battle rages, the more we see impatient Americans start complaining. I guess that’s what a society in a Tivo/Iphone era does.

And I certainly expect that from Democrats who blame George W. Bush for everything from hurricanes to health care.

But I think it takes some guts to stand behind a president who is doing what he believes to be right, even in the face of enormous opposition.

Liberals are emboldened by Republican-fueled criticism. And if good folks like Byron York aren’t careful, we’ll be handing over the White House on a silver platter to Hillary or Barack. After all, just how far can Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson distance themselves from the Bush Administration?

Liberals are emboldened by Republican-fueled criticism. And if good folks like Byron York aren’t careful, we’ll be handing over the White House on a silver platter to Hillary or Barack. After all, just how far can Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson distance themselves from the Bush Administration?

Besides, who really wants to be on the same side of the political fence as Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy…or Betty Williams?

Betty Williams won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1976 for creating a group that helped initiate peace talks in Northern Ireland. This week, she was the keynote speaker at The International Women’s Peace Conference in Dallas. According to the Dallas Morning News, during her speech she told the thousand or so attendees, “Right now, I could kill George Bush.” The paper said she went on to demand his impeachment since “the Muslim world right now is suffering beyond belief” as a result of this administration’s foreign policy.

What a woman of peace. That’s some “peace conference.”

I’m not sure what would happen if an American traveled to Northern Ireland and expressed a desire to kill Mary McAleese, the current President of Ireland. I doubt that such an opinion would be met with cheers and a standing ovation, as was reported had occurred when the Nobel laureate said what she said in Dallas.

And when we tracked Betty Williams down and put her on my radio show, I was shocked to hear her claim that any published report that quoted her as saying, “Right now, I could kill George Bush” was lying. I reminded her that according to numerous published reports, she used the exact same phrase in a July 24, 2006 speech to schoolchildren at the Brisbane City Hall. At that point in the interview, she sounded totally defeated and said she not only “regretted” saying it, when I asked her if she was sorry for saying it, she said she was. In fact, the Dallas Morning News sent me the audio of the speech which confirms their reporting of Ms. Williams comments about the president.

You can hear my interview with this awful woman at www.mikeonline.com.

People like Betty Williams and Michael Moore and Nancy Pelosi and Keith Olbermann and so many others on the left have made it quite clear what they think of George W. Bush. They teem with hatred and contempt.

They sure don’t need to get any assistance from us. Now, more than ever, we ought to stand behind President Bush.

But if people on the left OR right don’t want to support him these days, I have a heartfelt reminder: November of 2008 will be here soon enough.

Until then, how about getting off the president’s back?

[normy]

Its called trust. The immigration bill was so bad and his attack dogs like Graham and Martinez and himself insulted the base in the same manner the libs have for years (bigots, vigilantes, not wanting whats best for America). He knows we want border enforcement first and proof its being done but he does not want this so we are bigots.

When you push so ferociously against those who voted for you while defending great statesmen such as Ted Kennedy, there is a problem.

I believed in the Iraq war and still want to win it, but I question Bush's desire to really win it. I also question his motives now. When 7,000 Iraqis are coming to live in America after 3,000 Americans went to Iraq and gave their life so those 7,000 could be free, I have a real problem with that.

Its not that Conservatives don't want to win, its that we no longer trust Bush's motives and loyalty.

[SevenMinusOne]

Then we can talk about Iraq.

Absolutely disgusting bud! - We have warriors risking their lives 24/7 down range in Iraq - Fighting four your NS, in some of the most difficult conditions on this earth.

You didn't agree with the POTUS on the 30yr in the making problem of immigration....Fine....So be it. The base won that argument for now.

Now it is time to grow up (stop being an emotional fool over one issue) and guard the flanks of those warriors who are down range from the DEM Congress / MSM.

Our warriors down range DID NOT set WH immigration policy! But they sure as hell paid for it in 06 (when the GOP base stayed home and left them out to dry over a domestic issue). And they will pay for it even more if our base does not cowboy the fk up and support our CinC during this time.

If our base (people like you) do not stand up and support this CinC at the current time. Support Iraq and us seeing this mission through.....By keeping the intensity on Washington D.C. By demanding GOP representatives stand behind our warriors down range (via phone calls, emails, whatever the hell it takes)......well then, our base is of no better ilk then the DEM left (just different politics). Shameful if that comes to pass.

[DustyMoment]

Bush may be a good and decent man who believes he’s right, but that isn’t a cause to abandon him as a leader. He’s no Moses. Moses led his people into - AND OUT OF - the desert. Bush led us into the desrt and left us.

IMO, that’s not a reason to stick with him. It’s more than just his bad policies - MUCH more!! I respect him for not leading on the basis of the latest poll or focus group opinion (unlike his predecessor) and for the tax cuts and the prosecution of the GWOT. But that’s about as far as I can go. He hasn’t earned my respect beyond that.

[SevenMinusOne]

See post #22

[don-o]

Has Mike Gallagher ever had an original thought? Ever?

Oh, except for giving the Phelps cult huge chunks of his air time?

[Lurking in Kansas]

The ONLY question is, is he stupid or traitorous savant.. or a democrat mole..

Well, given those 3 options, I'm going with stupid. I was a BIG TIME GWB supporter, a real Kool-Aid drinker. But the amnesty BS turned me --for good. The country club ‘pubies & GWB still don’t realize what they’ve done to the party.

We won’t forget and move on.

[alarm rider]

Then support a real conservative and ditch the RINOs.

[azhenfud]

Bush needs to do SOMETHING CONSERVATIVE to reach Conservatives.

[SevenMinusOne]

IMO, that’s not a reason to stick with him. It’s more than just his bad policies - MUCH more!! I respect him for not leading on the basis of the latest poll or focus group opinion (unlike his predecessor) and for the tax cuts and the prosecution of the GWOT. But that’s about as far as I can go. He hasn’t earned my respect beyond that.

Did R. Reagan when he pushed through full amnesty (with no requirements) when he had a LARGE majority of Republicans in the Senate to boot? Did RR when he flip-flopped and not only abandoned the idea of private accounts but raised FICA taxes on all American's (thus burdening an entire other generation to the largest wealth stealing scheme known to man).

Did RR when he cut-n-ran from Beirut (after putting those warriors there in harms way). Did RR when he appointed the terrible SDO to the SCOUTS simply because she was a women and it was the PC thing to do?? Did you excuse R.R of losing our large majority in the Senate in 86 because he "wasn't a leader" or a "true conservative".

The standards that are held to POTUS/CinC GWB are simply tremendous and were not held to others prior.

[laurie_d]

Before I start, other Bush haters here on FR call me a “newbie” because I don’t have internet longevity. I’ll get that out of the way.

For those of you claiming to not support Bush now, even though you elected him twice, which exact policy of his has changed? Bush isn’t flipping and flopping all over the place. His policies have remained the same since he first ran for President. The ones that have changed are you, the psuedo convervatives who don’t have the patience of a three year old. Bush was SO right yesterday during his news conference.

So, Hydroschock, name THE policy of Bush’s that has changed. THE changed policy that has caused you to no longer support him. THE policy that you obviously agreed with when you voted to elect him twice that has changed so drastically. And, please, specifics.

If, as I suspect, your response and the others who will jump on the bashing bandwagon chime in with “immigration”, you better take a long hard look AT Bush’s stance on immigration in 2000 and 2004. It has changed how? It was so important to most of you that it wasn’t even mentioned as anything other than an afterthought.

What I suspect is one of two things. Those of you bashing Bush just don’t have the guts to actually stand up to the media and liberals who are interchangeable, or you were never Bush voters in the first place.

[normy]

I’m not real sure he wants to win the damned thing. There are ways to win war. The surge needs time to work but whats next? 10,000 Iraqi refugees while another 1,000 American soldiers die but those fleeing Iraqis won’t stay and fight for their homeland?

[Smokin' Joe]

According to Byron York of the National Review, the Republican Party base has simply decided to throw Mr. Bush under the wheels of the bus.

Mr. York is wrong, of course.

We didn't throw him under the bus.

He jumped.

If he wants back on the sidewalk, he should abandon the amnesty crap, secure the border, and make bloody sure the word gets out wbout what is going right in Iraq, (before the media wins the war for Al-Qaida--who would stone that pack of stupid faggots in a heartbeat).

[mefistofelerevised]

Being a good and decent man is just great. I don’t know about his personal life so can’t make a judgement on that. Giving Africa 15 billions dollars for aids might be generous, but I doubt if it will do any good or will be of any benefit to America. I’d like a president who does the will of the American people and does wha is in the best interest of the American people. He failed us on illegals and is still failing on border security. The current bag of top candidates is not good. The rulers have lost touch with the ruled. conservatives are not lining up with democrats. They’re lining up with Conservatives. President Bush has abandoned conservatives too many times.

[ClearCase_guy]

You raise good points. I certainly do support the troops, and I apologize if my words indicated that I was willing to hang them out to dry. It was not my intention.

I will say, however, that wars are political. Certainly since Vietnam. If the president does not tend adequately to the political side of the war, he opens himself to Walter Cronkite going on TV after we won Tet and declaring that we've lost the war. After that, it's all downhill and the soldiers have died for nothing. I don't want to see that happen again.

I think that President Bush will make headway on the political side of the war, and thus headway on the military side of the war, if he tends to his base a little more than he has done so.

I meant no offense to the troops.

[Diogenesis]

Those of you bashing Bush just don’t have the guts to actually stand up to the media and liberals who are interchangeable, or you were never Bush voters in the first place.

Many conservatives have stood up to the media AND liberals
only to find that Pres. Bush has a new base, consisting of Democrats and Sen. Kennedy.

[laurie_d]

Baloney.

I’ve never abandoned him as some of the rest of you have.

And thank you for not answering the question.

I’ll ask again. What policy of Bush’s (specifics, please) has changed?

Or has weakness set in? Not Bush’s, yours?

[kabar]

I strongly support Bush on the war in Iraq and the WOT in general. I was also very disappointed about his support of an amnesty bill and holding border security [including a program to control visa overstays] hostage to the passage of comprehensive immigration reform.

The author of this article fails to mention the link between the need to control our borders and national security. Bush undermines his own case for the need for us to be in Iraq while almost 6 years after 9/11 doing little to secure our borders and implementing fully the US Visit Program that was passed in 1996.

If/when this country is struck again with another 9/11 attack and it is found that the perpetrators either came across our southern border illegally or were on legal visas and overstayed them, as did four of the 19 9/11 hijackers, who will be held accountable? George Bush.

[mefistofelerevised]

Being a good and decent man is just great. I don’t know about his personal life so can’t make a judgement on that. Giving Africa 15 billions dollars for aids might be generous, but I doubt if it will do any good or will be of any benefit to America. I’d like a president who does the will of the American people and does what is in the best interest of the American people. He failed us on illegals and is still failing on border security. The current bag of top candidates is not good. The rulers have lost touch with the ruled. Conservatives are not lining up with democrats. They’re lining up with Conservatives. President Bush has abandoned conservatives too many times.

[tgusa]

Good,thoughtful post. Many of us conservatives voted for GWB - both times - because the alternative was too awful to comprehend, IOW we held our noses when we voted. Now we must take the initiative in the primaries to ensure a TRUE conservative (not a ‘compassionate conservative’) gets the chance to run for the highest office in the land. I don’t want to have to hold my nose to vote again.

[HoustonTech]

Conservatives haven’t abandoned Bush. Radicals have. Conservatives are not radicals.