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?

[SuziQ]

There’s obviously no reasoning with them about it. They’ve gotten their knickers in a twist and won’t hear anything to the contrary.

[60Gunner]

Ah do declayuh!

Fiddle-de-de!

Rosebud...

Oh, crap. Wrong movie.

[LibKill]

See #440

[nicmarlo]

He said I did not want "what's right for America".

He can shove that up his @ss.

I did 9 years in the USMC. He has no right to question my patriotism. And he did question my patriotism.

Indeed, he uttered those words, insulting and besmirching us all, especially insulting to those who have honorably served our country. Thank you for your service, LibKill.

[SuziQ]

Actually, in post 22, DevSix is taking YOU to task for your comments in Post 5 showing your willingness to continue to pound the President on Immigration. Your attitude like so many others' who have become so offended by the President, has created the atmosphere for the Democrats to pound HIM in the press and use their clout in Congress to make his prosecution of the War much more difficult, thus placing our military in danger.

You may say you support the troops, but by continually dissing the President over the Immigration issue, and continuing to denigrate him even beyond that, you're handing the issue of Iraq to the Democrats. Just what do you think THEY'LL do with it?

[SuziQ]

The President was always in favor of Immigration reform. Maybe you didn’t pay attention to that until it became a legislative battle, but he was always for it.

[VRWC For Truth]

Bush needs to declare war on Democrats. Tell the kook left fringe to STFU and avoid the LSM for more Conservative media outlets. He’s the most powerful person on the planet yet he’s such a wuss taking on the ‘Rats. He has the means with no resolve.

[nicmarlo]

The President was always in favor of Immigration reform. Maybe you didn’t pay attention to that until it became a legislative battle, but he was always for it.

Uh....while we're strolling down memory lane, let's remember it all:

In 1995, the Texas Governor's [yes, as in George W. Bush] press secretary, Karen Hughes, issued a statement regarding Bush's support of a legal appeal by Texas Attorney General Dan Morales [Texas v. United States, B-94-228 (S.D. Texas 1995) 95-40721 (5th Cir.) (pdf file)], to recover $1.34 billion spent by his state on the incarceration and education of illegal immigrants.

"It's not fair to the taxpayers of Texas to stick them with the bill when the government fails to enforce immigration laws," Hughes said to reporters then.

Karen Hughes wasn't speaking without authority. In 1995, when Gov. Bush was suing the United States' Government for $5 billion, he said:

"If the federal government cannot do its job of enforcing the borders, then it owes the states monies to pay for its failure."

That's right, when George W. Bush was Governor of the State of Texas, he sued the federal government for reimbursement of the costs of incarcerating illegal aliens, yet there are millions more illegal aliens in the United States now than when Bill Clinton was President.

* * * And, when campaigning for President in 1999, George W. Bush issued this statement:

[Federal expenditures would be more effective] "...at the front end, to stop people from illegally entering our country, not at the back end, by reimbursing states after it has failed to enforce the border." [I] "would allocate additional resources to enforcing the border, so states such as Texas and California would not have the huge expenses they currently do." (San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 9, 1999)

And, during his 2004 Campaign, the President said this:

THIRD PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES' DEBATE
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY, TEMPE, ARIZONA
October 13, 2004

SCHIEFFER: Let's go to a new question, Mr. President. I got more e-mail this week on this question than any other question. And it is about immigration.

I'm told that at least 8,000 people cross our borders illegally every day. Some people believe this is a security issue, as you know.....

How do you see it? And what do we need to do about it?

BUSH: I see it as a serious problem. I see it as a security issue, I see it as an economic issue, and I see it as a human-rights issue.

We're increasing the border security of the United States. We've got 1,000 more Border Patrol agents on the southern border.

We're using new equipment. We're using unmanned vehicles to spot people coming across.

And we'll continue to do so over the next four years.

---

If the President is as serious as he claims to be about securing our borders, and clamping down on illegal aliens coming by the droves into our country, then why do we have the following results from him and his Administration?

...according to the Appropriations Committee yesterday [June 13, 2007], there's $864 million cash on hand in the Department of Homeland Security right now for building the border fence. Now, in seven months since the president signed this bill -- that's October 26 -- they've only built, according to the schedule we got yesterday, 13 miles...

[SuziQ]

Love that piece by the Anchoress. It really puts the whole Bush presidency in perspective.

[60Gunner]

Well said!

Gawd, we could sure use another Teddy Roosevelt!

[xzins]

pyrrhic victories

Echoes of Mike McConnell in there. I think I heard the same approach on his show (or his Saturday clone's show) about a week ago.

I disagreed with McConnell(?). This current state of affairs is only better if the new bill was far worse. It was far worse. It gave immediate status to every single illegal in the country, and it did it before any barrier was constructed.

We already have no barrier, but at least we can argue the invaders are illegal.

Regarding the remainder of your post. I agree. Pres. Bush deserves credit for every fine thing, and there are many, that he has done.

[nicmarlo]

Gawd, we could sure use another Teddy Roosevelt!

Amen to that one!

[Colorado Doug]

Since the President was crystal clear on what he wanted to see as far as Immigration reform was concerned WAY back when he first started running for office, why are you surprised, and worse, OFFENDED by his stance?

He didn't say anything at the time about merging the US with Canada and Mexico or transcontinental highways of turning Mexican truckers loose on American soil. No, there is quite a lot that he didn't say. And why is he doing all this in secret until it is jammed down our throats?

[LibKill]

The President was always in favor of Immigration reform. Maybe you didn’t pay attention to that until it became a legislative battle, but he was always for it.

He never said that he was in favor of amnesty until he was a very lame duck.

And he questioned my patriotism.

I now question his patriotism.

Between the two of us I did more time in uniform and a LOT more overseas than he did. (he did zero time overseas)

I am a patriot.

He is a politician and not a very good one. I regret voting for him.

He is no patriot, unless he is a patriot of Mexico.

[Kaslin]

You are completly ignoring that it is the left like Senators Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Speaker Pelosi etc who want amnesty for the illegals because that would mean votes for demomcrats. President Bush only wants what he thinks is good for the country

[Colorado Doug]

Also, Bush rebuilt the Clintons and aimed Hillary right at us again for another 8 years of hell.

You have a good point there. Wasn't it disgusting to watch Clinton and Bush Sr. running around together, best friends that they are.

[LibKill]

Gawd, we could sure use another Teddy Roosevelt!

Oh yes. I'd squeeze myself back into my USMC dress blues and reenlist for such a president, at my age, 50.

[DrDeb]

I thank you for your service! [FYI: I’m a staunch supporter of our military and contribute A LOT of money to military causes . . . I also serve as an unofficial advocate for and advisor to MANY veterans on my campus — most under the age of 25 . . . I help them deal with a breadth of issues including Stalinist professors who despise them because they are (former) military.]

Now that you know I’m not the enemy, I hope you will take my recommendation and read the President’s ENTIRE speech (not a few cherry picked lines) and draw your own conclusions.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070529-7.html

[60Gunner]

You do realize the last time Congress declared war was in WWII, don't you?

Speaks volumes about the lack of moral courage that has slowly flooded the halls of Congress, doesn't it?

[LibKill]

Thank you for showing some class.

I have no support for bush since he insulted me.

If he ever takes back that "if you don't want what's right for America" comment and also apologizes for the arrogance of "see you at the signing ceremony" when he tried to shove Mexico down our throats for the SECOND time...

If he apologizes, humbly, with no ifs-ands-or-buts. If he apologizes ABJECTLY to us conservatives I may be interested in reading something he said.

Until then he can shove his whole 8 years up his butt.