Bush a four-letter word at CPAC

Conservatives aren’t sure who’s the Republican presidential frontrunner in 2012. They disagree over how sharply to attack President Barack Obama and on the question of whether a back-to-basics approach is the path back to majority.

But if there’s one thing those attending the annual Conservative Political Action Conference this week agree on, it is this: They don’t want another George W. Bush.

Few come out right out and say it, but they don’t have to. There’s no nostalgia for the past eight years, no tributes to Bush and no sessions dedicated to exploring his presidency.

Indeed, for a president who publicly embraced conservative principles, there is little evidence that the movement returns the sentiment.

When the subject of the 43rd president has come up at CPAC—where he spoke each year of his presidency—it’s usually been in an unflattering context.

Conservative icon Newt Gingrich, the former House Speaker, railed against the “Bush-Obama continuity in economic policy” and the “Bush-Obama big spending program” in a speech Friday.

"We had big spending under Bush and now we have big spending under Obama," Gingrich said. "And so now we have two failures."

He wasn’t the only high-profile conservative taking shots at the former president.

They didn't have to follow him. Had they stood up to him, they'd be in the driver's seat now. Instead, they have zero credibility.

Exactly! Conservatives essentially messed up by following a moderates principles. I could basically cut them slack up to 2006, but never again! I want the moderate/rino's either to fall inline with conservative principles, or GTF out of the republican party!

Never again, should any moderate/rino be in control of this CONSERVATIVE party! NEVER!

Not ignorance, M. I watched it happen, often times in my own conference room

It's still populism proffered by a person who doesn't even realize we have Marxist in the White House. Pretty ignorant if you ask me.

Virtually all of us know about CRA, Those of us who have cared to find out are also aware of the fact that the CRA is at best marginally responsible for a very small part of the economic meltdown in this country.

Marginally responsible? Please. If this is what you believe then you really don't understand the CRA, ACORN or what happened at Freddie and Fannie. You're uniquely unqualified to be lecturing us about any of this.

Government intervention in the markets was the primary mover for the meltdown we're experiencing. That private industry found a way to make money from it, at least for a short time, is not the issue. Blaming industry is just more class warfare and the making of excuses for people who want to blame someone or something else for their stupidity and irresponsibility. Main street is sticking Wall Street with about $2 trillion in loans that will never be paid back. Do you want to reward this kind of behavior?

I hope to God someone has declared war on those greedy crooks.

LOL! If we just had more regulation like Sarbanes-Oxley then everyone would play by the rules and we'd never have corruption or booms and busts. Well, it's clear from your comments that you think the right guy is in the White House now and that economic justice you crave is coming. Maybe I'm wrong and you think a guy like Ron Paul or Huckabee can save the party while bringing those crooks in industry to justice. The only question remaining is whether having one of those two heading the ticket in 2012 will cause us to lose 49 states or if they will be responsible for being the first to lose all 50.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.