Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ingraham: Bush Not Invincible
www.lauraingraham.com ^ | July 7, 2003 | Laura Ingraham

Posted on 07/07/2003 9:22:15 PM PDT by Choose Ye This Day

http://www.LauraIngraham.com April 7, 2003

HE'S NOT INVINCIBLE

The Bushies have already raised $35 million dollars! The President's approval ratings are still hovering around 60 percent! Our forces have already captured most of the thugs in its Iraqi deck of "most wanted" cards! The "l" word is beginning to reverberate through political circles--i.e., it will be Bush in a landslide in 2004. This comes from many of the same chatterers who were saying that John McCain presented a serious threat to Bush in the 2000 primaries.

Perhaps this presidential election will be a snoozer. Perhaps the President will run away with the thing--taking even the electoral prizes of California and New York. But right now that prospect seems far from certain. And there is a chance that President Bush will find himself with a base that is unmotivated, which spells catastrophe for any candidate.

Let's look at where we are. Yes, the country trusts this president with our military. Yes, it appreciates his aggressive stance in the war on terror. Yes, it thinks he's doing the right thing on taxes. But along with all those positives, there are undeniable negatives:

1. Unemployment is disturbingly high. (It may be a "lagging indicator" but tell that to the millions of people coast-to-coast who are out of work) 2. The war in Iraq is "over" except that we have a soldier a day getting killed over there. 3. Democrats, as we see with the Howard Dean boomlet, are energized, infuriated, and have the media on their side.

Even considering these stormclouds, the President still has a lot going for him--including a lackluster Democrat field. But this only means that it is critical for him to make absolutely certain that his base--the conservatives--are really, really happy. I am here to report to you that there is trouble in River City.

Why? Consider the response President--no, candidate--George Bush gave recently when a reporter pressed him on whether he supported amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage: "I don't know if it's necessary yet. Let's let the lawyers look at the full ramifications of the recent Supreme Court hearing. What I do support is the notion that marriage is between a man and a woman."

On the heels on one of the most outrageous Supreme Court decision in decades, which established a Constitutional right to homosexual sodomy, the President fumbled. He punted. He referenced his lawyers. Not good.

The salient point here is not about gay rights per se, it is that President Bush's comments indicated that the Administration increasingly views its conservative supporters as a political embarrassment, a group whose expectations need to be managed. This is a colossal mistake. Without the support of millions of conservatives who showed up to vote for him in 2000, George Bush would be spending a lot more time clearing brush in Crawford. We all know how his father's political calculation to raise taxes sat with conservatives--we never forgave him. (One could almost hear the conversation Bush the elder had with himself at the time--"Gee, I hate to break my 'no new taxes pledge,' but even if I bail on that, where are conservative going to go? Vote for that Clinton fellow?! Nah.")

After eight years of the Clinton follies, conservatives were convinced that George W. Bush was not his father's son--the ghost of '92 had scared sense into him about offending "the base." On the issue of tax cuts, President Bush certainly learned. He has brilliantly backed the Democrats into a corner, enacting a tax cut that no one, even a year ago, thought had a chance. But conservatism cannot survive on tax cuts alone.

For weeks, conservatives from across the country have been filling the email box of my radio show with doubts about where this Administration is taking us. On the size of the government, one listner from Seattle asked, "How is it that the number of employees at the Homeland Security Department is greater than the aggregate of all the agencies that were folded into it?" A law student in Boston wrote: "Our troops are still getting shot at by thugs and Saddam loyalists in Iraq, and now we're about to nation-build in Liberia?!!" Scores of others wrote to complain about the Administration's $400 billion "triangulation" strategy on prescription drug coverage for seniors--a move that Dick Morris desribed as "brilliantly Clintonian." There is also a constant cry about the President's anemic efforts to curb illegal immigration. Last month, the Bush Treasury Department rammed through regulations that permit banks to accept "Mexican consular ID cards" as legal identification. (Mexican officials issue these cards by the thousands every week to illegals living here.)

But it was the President's dodge on the marriage amendment that seemed to touch off a mini-revolt in the heartland. Even people (like me) who think state laws against sodomy are idiotic were upset. In the words of one fed-up stay-at-home mom in Kansas: "What's the point of doing the grassroots work for conservative candidates if this is what we're getting?"

Some of this frustration is no doubt overblown. And there is some truth to the statement that no politician will ever be conservative enough for the hardcore types. Nevertheless, as smart and politically savvy as Karl Rove, Ken Mehlman and other top Bush strategists are, they need to remember that conservatives need more than lip service to volunteer to do the nitty-gritty work that wins elections. Knocking on doors, passing our pamphlets, answering phones, and manning voter registration desks for Republican candidates is the sort of work done by people who believe that America is about more than tax cuts and the war on terror.

They believe that the Supreme Court's decision upholding the use of race to promote diversity in universities is an insult to the Constitution and our goal of a color-blind society. (The Administration quietly praised the Court's holding.) They believe that while all Americans should be treated with dignity and decency, marriage is a sacred institution in the eyes of God. They believe that we should use our superior technology and appropriate manpower to keep our borders secure.

The President won the support of many across the country precisely because he defied his elite roots in his style and substance. Unlike Al Gore, he was a regular guy who just happened to go to Yale, Harvard and be raised in prominent, wealthy political family.

Now, more than ever, conservatives need to hear from that regular guy--strong, sensible, and unafraid of the scorn of the elites. The big tent philosophy is a smart one--but the tent cannot stay up for long without the proper grounding stakes.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; bush; conservatism; election; gwb2004; lauraingraham
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-134 next last
"Conservatism cannot survive on tax cuts alone."

I love W, but Laura is right. He needs to stand up for what made this country great, and loudly fight those who are trying to water down, erode, or p*ss away our greatness--indeed, our goodness.

1 posted on 07/07/2003 9:22:15 PM PDT by Choose Ye This Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All


How we have, and can, change the world


History of Free Republic


Click The Logo to Donate
Click The Logo To Donate



2 posted on 07/07/2003 9:24:10 PM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS; hattend; ccmay; My2Cents; DuncanWaring; DLfromthedesert; Lauratealeaf
Laura Ingraham PING
3 posted on 07/07/2003 9:28:09 PM PDT by Choose Ye This Day (It's all part of life's rich pageant, you know?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
I also fully agree with Laura. Bush looks strong now, but there are many reasons to think that lots can change for the worse in the next sixteen months. Laura covers many of these reasons.
4 posted on 07/07/2003 9:28:14 PM PDT by kesg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
His answer to this is a perfect example of why the Constitution Party is getting so much buzz around here lately.

Conservatives have nothing to lose. If Al Gore had tried to expand the federal government this much then at least the GOP congress would try to stop him. Since a Republican is expanding government it is A-OK with them.
5 posted on 07/07/2003 9:31:24 PM PDT by Ahban
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
Will you please add my name to your Laura Ingraham PING list? I like the way she thinks. (Thanks!)
6 posted on 07/07/2003 9:33:56 PM PDT by arasina (America: STILL the BEST! Offering Freedom, Justice and The Pursuit of Happiness Since 1776)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ahban
His answer to this is a perfect example of why the Constitution Party is getting so much buzz around here lately.

Actually, the CP is getting buzz because the same three guys have about fifty screen names between 'em.

7 posted on 07/07/2003 9:35:06 PM PDT by Poohbah (I must be all here, because I'm not all there!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
Thank you. Great article. And Laura has a gay brother whom she dearly loves, so you know she's not coming from a position of hate when she discusses this issue.
8 posted on 07/07/2003 9:36:54 PM PDT by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
I think April 7, 2003 should be July 7, 2003, but other than that, this article is spot on in all respects. W should be grateful that Ingraham is around to provide him with counsel.
9 posted on 07/07/2003 9:40:38 PM PDT by Kryptonite (Free Miguel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
There are two numbers that the Bush campaign is concerned about--and, unlike Bush 41, they are not interest rates or unemployment. They are focused on the approval number and the Dow Jones. The latest tax legislation has produced a rebound in the market and that can foretell an improving economy six months later. The Democrats' field of candidates is a peculiar mix of egotists (Can you really imagine a debate between Bush and Dean if the latter cannot even get through a friendly interview with Russert without messing up?). Some of her main concerns or premises might not be so critical tomorrow.

W. Bush has done something that his father failed to do--he HAS kept in touch with the average citizen. He is out and about making personal appearances before large groups almost daily. Bush is becoming the first President that these citizens have seen in real life--and they are not going to forget the experience. He mentions people's names, talks about their programs, etc. He has shown the magic touch in bringing the White House to the people, which his father never did. The father appeared to be a detached elitest. This guy is closer to a country music star.

Also, unlike his father, he's a delegator and he's going to let the Senate (i.e., Frist) do the deed and get a constitutional amendment passed regarding marriage. He's said upfront that gays can have whatever relationship they want--just don't call it marriage. More will happen yet on the affirmative action quota cases so the jury is still out on the impact of those decisions.

What is critical is for conservatives to realize that one of the greatest and most lasting legacies of a conservative presidency is a judicial system bursting with conservative judges who will not legislate from the bench, except for reversing prior crazy liberal rulings. It is more important than ever that they continue to support Bush and get more Republicans in the Senate.

W. might not be perfect--but given any alternative, he's the absolute best leader we've had in a couple of decades.

10 posted on 07/07/2003 9:40:46 PM PDT by MHT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
Terrific President. Outstanding Administration. The republic has rarely seen better.
11 posted on 07/07/2003 9:40:56 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
"For weeks, conservatives from across the country have been filling the email box of my radio show with doubts about where this Administration is taking us."

One large, resounding Laura Ingraham PING.

Laura isn't alone in this, I have been having the same doubts.

I voted for GWB, and unless a better candidate comes around I will hold my nose and vote for him again.

Ignoring the un-checked hordes of illegal aliens streaming across our borders, a willingness to sign-off on an extension of the AWB, and his supposed contemplation of sending troops to Liberia, give me cause for concern.

George needs to wake up and read Free Republic, the troops are restless.
12 posted on 07/07/2003 9:43:08 PM PDT by Duramaximus ( American Born, Gun_Toting , Aerospace Worker Living In A State That Worships Socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kesg
I live in Tucson, and I am furious about the lack of urgency with the immigration problem.

American citizens are practically strip-searched at airports, but our borders remain wide open.

If I'm going to work hard to get this President re-elected, I want to be sure that he's not just giving us lip service on important issues, like U.S. sovereignty.

13 posted on 07/07/2003 9:43:31 PM PDT by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
Nobody anywhere or at anytime is unbeatable.
Clinton was the worse of scoundrels but he knew well enough the truth behind "It's the economy, stupid!" First things being first, voters have to possess their creature comforts or there is going to be a change.

Here's real wisdom too:'In the words of one fed-up stay-at-home mom in Kansas: "What's the point of doing the grassroots work for conservative candidates if this is what we're getting?"'
What does it mean when WJC can't enact prescription coverage but Bush does? What does it mean when the cost of government is still climbing but simply distributed differently? As the lady asks, How do you get excited about that?
14 posted on 07/07/2003 9:49:16 PM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
If there are enough tax cuts, govt. will be forced to get smaller and that is good enough for me.
15 posted on 07/07/2003 9:49:44 PM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
Bush Not Invincible

We all know that.

16 posted on 07/07/2003 9:51:12 PM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PGalt
You forgot to turn on your sarcasm tag.

Bush and the GOP have
become the party of shills for votes.

I don't intend to vote for Bush. I intend to rent a van and a driver and get out the democrats to vote him out. We were better off under divided government.

The GOP and the die hard Bots on this board think that Bush can screw everybody right up until election day, and we will all return to the fold.

He's pushed it beyond the limits. In order to appear Clintonesque, he approves of CFR, assault weapon ban, HIPPA, new arsenic regs, more wealth transfer payments to low income and seniors, etc. etc.

Me, I'm not voting for Clinton lite.
17 posted on 07/07/2003 9:52:42 PM PDT by Jesse (I didn't leave...The GOP...left me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
"If there are enough tax cuts, govt. will be forced to get smaller and that is good enough for me."


Gee, I thought tax cuts were supposed to result in increased federal revenues...that's according to all the GOP conservatives.

So how is it increased tax cuts will lead to smaller government, if the government will get more tax dollars from the stimulus? Huh?


18 posted on 07/07/2003 9:55:03 PM PDT by Jesse (I didn't leave...The GOP...left me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
Agreed. If President Bush attempts to run from the Left, he shouldn't be surprised to find conservatives sitting out the next election. Our support shouldn't be taken for granted. There IS trouble in River City and the President had better get back on the ball.
19 posted on 07/07/2003 9:56:20 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jesse
depends, if you cut the rate from 90 percent to 50%, more money comes in. if you cut from 20% to zero, less money comes in.

either way, private sector gets bigger relative to public sector and that is good enough for me.
20 posted on 07/07/2003 10:03:05 PM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-134 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson