Bush as Clinton: A terrible cost

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review ^ | Tuesday, July 1, 2003 | editorial

[Willie Green]

George Bush has been pulling a Bill Clinton as of late. Politicos consider it politically savvy. We consider it not very becoming of a Republican who flashed conservative credentials that, on closer inspection, might as well have been manufactured by Hasbro.

[Willie Green]

Time for a true conservative candidate with some spine.

Ann Coulter for prez in 2004!

[TLBSHOW]

Were is the picture of Ann, you know the rules....

[Egregious Philbin]

The personal attack on her and your paper from the writer of "Crying about Coulter" (June 18) is typical of the extreme left's method of attacking the person instead of the issues.

Calling Couric the "affable Eva Braun" of whatever doesn't qualify as "attacking the person instead of the issues"?

[Search4Truth]

Blame the voting half of the country who would have another Clinton in the Whitehouse, given half the chance. This all or nothing attitiude by the Republicans will get us Hitlery as President. Bush is not a Monarch, who can do whatever he will. He serves the will of all the people, not just the Republicans. He either does so or he becomes an one-term ex-president.

[KDD]

I think his father thought that also.

We'll see.

Bush is not dancing with the people who brought him.

[GraniteStateConservative]

The Gipper said it best (the guy who created a new Cabinet Department and raised taxes four times and put Kennedy and O'Connor on the bench as president and gave Elizabeth Dole a springboard to the U. S. Senate-- all sins apparently)...

"When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn't like it. "Compromise" was a dirty word to them and they wouldn't face the fact that we couldn't get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don't get it all, some said, don't take anything. "I'd learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: 'I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.'

"If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that's what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.

--Ronald Reagan, in his autobiography, An American Life

[AAABEST]

That's just not relevant. Reagan used to wheel and deal to get what he wanted, and Reagan was a solid conservative who had the meida and both houses against him when he permanenlty changed the tax structure and won a cold war. To him government was the problem.

What GWB is doing is by no means "compromise", it's a complete sellout capitulation.

[meenie]

There is a difference. Clinton had the liberal Democrats in his pockets and picked up moderates with his triangulation. Bush does not have the conservatives in his pocket with his spending policies and is trying to woo moderates with his move to the left. If he continues, he is a sure loser because the Dems can easily outgain him with their edge in voter registration.

[Search4Truth]

LOL. It is not the just the Republicans party. And I would say that the Republicans did get the first dance. :)

[staytrue]

The way to have a smaller govt. is to cut taxes and keep cutting them until the govt. runs out of money. Then the spending cuts will happen. You can't cut spending because if you want to cut xyz program, there will be too much pressure to keep it going. But if you cut xyz to cut a budget deficit, you might succeed.

[eskimo]

This all or nothing attitiude by the Republicans will get us Hitlery as President.

Well then let's get on with the showdown. All this pretending that the GOP and Dem political machines are not owned and operated by the same aspiring socialist administrators is getting tiresome.

[SUSSA]

That quote keeps getting thrown around here. The trouble is it doesn't apply. Conservatives aren't getting 80% of what they want. Liberals are getting 80% + of their agenda.

With this guy, conservatives would be very lucky to get 30% of what they want. Most might even be happy if he just didn't increase government more than Clinton did.

When conservatives are getting 80% of what they want, you won't need that qoute.

[Willie Green]

The way to have a smaller govt. is to cut taxes and keep cutting them until the govt. runs out of money.

And when will that be when the congresscritters rubberstamp an increase in the National Debt every year???

[Search4Truth]

With public approval high, the Republican gains in Congress in the mid-term elections, almost certain re-election in 2004, with again more Republican gains in Congress, the Democrats leaderless and issueless, I would say Bush is doing something right.

I think it is time for us focus pressure on Congress to pony up, and stop laying all the responsibility at Bush's feet to carry the Conservative torch.

[Search4Truth]

A BUMP for the Gipper

[F16Fighter]

"The Gipper said it best (the guy who created a new Cabinet Department and raised taxes four times and put Kennedy and O'Connor on the bench as president...

'What I seek is the highest possible batting average... 'If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that's what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.'"

Hey, I love Reagan, but just what the h*ll kind of negotiator was he to have conservatives wind up with the likes of Kennedy and O'Connor??

The SC was and still is NOT the place to "compromise" on with 'singles-hitters.'

Hopefully Dubya will surprise us and appoint people who are capable of clearing the bases...

[KDD]

Compromise has only lead us to settle for things we do not want and matters of principle leave no room for compromise. The Republican party must realize that its only roots lay in conservatism. Conservatism is the only tie that binds together this party, and we must have leaders and elected officials who represent that dogma.

It is time for the Republican party to throw off the limitations of the compromise mentality.

[SUSSA]

Every time congress tries to act like conservatives Bush tells them to stop. Take the increased welfare for people who don't pay taxes.

DeLay and the conservatives were set to demand moving the backloaded tax cuts forward and additional tax cuts in order to give pu the additional welfare. Bush told them to just pass the welfare and forget getting anything for it.

The CFR was the same thing. Bush told them to just get something passed and stop holding out for a good bill.

[eskimo]

The way to have a smaller govt. is to cut taxes and keep cutting them until the govt. runs out of money. Then the spending cuts will happen.

I know of no basis in historical reality to justify such fantastic statement, do you?

[Search4Truth]

"It is time for the Republican party to throw off the limitations of the compromise mentality."

The Democrat's stategery in a nutshell.

You are ignoring the first rule of politics - stay in power. Without which, all other questions of principle are moot.

Bush is not the Conservative's President, he is America's President. And according to them, he is doing fine. That is why he will stay in power. For a politician without office is impotent.

Your no compromise strategery would have him suffer the same fate as his dad. Do you think that out of the realm of possibility?

And yes, I like the word strategery. :)