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 previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-134 next last
To: MNLDS
From a practical political standpoint, Laura is wrong regarding the recent SCOTUS decisions. Bush has not chosen even one Justice yet so he can't be blamed for court decisions. And if she expects Bush to trot out the red meat now, why should he do that 16 months before the election?

If I were Bush, I'd deflect the decisions and focus the issue on getting his own nominees passed and ask again why are his nominees being held hostage by a minority of the Senate. Then, as the elections get closer, use those court decisions to spell out home important it is for him to be choosing judges, not Howard Deam or John Kerry.

There's no reason to shoot the political wad now when it will be forgotten by the time votes are cast. Laura wants Bush to draw a line in the sand but they have the potential of alienating as many voters as it energizes if he goes about it the wrong way. If he's going to say what's politically unpopular, he ought to say it now. If he's going to say what most Americans support, he'll save it for next year when he'll get more political mileage from it.

21 posted on 07/07/2003 10:03:51 PM PDT by Tall_Texan (Half the people you encounter are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jesse
Good points. President Bush cannot turn around the domestic socialist ship (Titanic) of state singlehandedly. In prosecuting the war on terror, he has done things that NO OTHER POLITICIAN would even think of doing. That is a direct result of his leadership and administration. To change almost 100 years of domestic socialist creep, is going to take a mindset change of monumental proportions (all the while attacked by the socialists within). The President has planted the incremental seeds to change the way of thinking in many areas...educational accountablility, social security, judicial nominations, etc., That is why WE are here. Thanks for your input.
22 posted on 07/07/2003 10:23:36 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MHT
BTTT!
23 posted on 07/07/2003 10:28:06 PM PDT by Matchett-PI (Marxist DemocRATS, Nader-Greens, and Religious KOOKS = a clear and present danger to our Freedoms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MHT
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.

Huhh????

Frist can't even break the feeble DemonCRAP fillibuster that is holding up our judicial nominees and you expect him to be able to shepherd a constitutional amendment through?

What universe are you living in?

24 posted on 07/07/2003 10:34:35 PM PDT by Ronin (Qui tacet consentit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
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.

I think that political strategy has a name: "Bread and Circuses"

25 posted on 07/07/2003 10:36:02 PM PDT by Dr Warmoose (I just LOVE to rant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
no pics of laura yet?
26 posted on 07/07/2003 10:38:44 PM PDT by isom35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
The conservative issues pushed by President Bush, I LOVE. But the liberal garbage... well, I don't just disike it, I HATE it. And they were big ones. Campaign "reform", prescription medicine for ALL, Supreme Court debacle, no action on illegal aliens which menas illegal voters. Good grief, if my precious vote is cancelled by the illegals (as I believe it was in WA) why go to the polls at all? So, Mr. President, please get back on track. Stop the spending. Be a conservative.
27 posted on 07/07/2003 10:43:10 PM PDT by Libertina (If speech is restricted because it 's harsh, it isn't free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jesse
We were better off under divided government.

And poll after poll reflects that same sentiment, that the country is better off with no one party hegemony.

Empirical evidence suggest that the country is better off economically under a Demoncat Executive branch and a GOP legislative. Of course, a Demoncat in any branch brings about cultural and moral ruin. But hey, the Libertine Party gets a hard on over that thought, so at least someone benefits from this whole deal.

With the huge influence the Fifth column/Fourth Estate has over the American sheeple, when they shill for the Marxist candidate and cast curses on the Konservative, it really effects people's outlook, and quite frankly it is the public's impression of what they believe the future holds that really makes the difference. In the case of American Politics, it is the case that Perception governs Reality.

28 posted on 07/07/2003 10:46:11 PM PDT by Dr Warmoose (I just LOVE to rant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Ahban
The CP is smaller and less viable than the Libertarian Party, which has less than zero chance of electing a cadidate for anything higher than dog catcher in some tiny hamlet.

Those you, who whine and whinge and think that voting for the fringe is going to get you anything at all, are delusional and playing into the hands of those ( the Dems ! ) whom you claim to hate. And no, even a Hillary presidency is NOT going to cause this nation to have a civil war.

29 posted on 07/07/2003 10:48:21 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tall_Texan
Bush better straighten out. If he keeps it up, it will be two 'democrats' running. Like Buchanan said , there's not a dimes worth of difference between them.

Rush, every day sounds discussed, and bitting his tongue over the antics of a wimpy Bush when comes to sticking to our 'platform'. Bush is trying to be too smart by half.

30 posted on 07/07/2003 10:49:06 PM PDT by duckln
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ahban
The constitution party is going to accomplish alot. It is going to assure that we will either get Hillary, or Dean in the White House. Then the disgruntled who don't get everything they want will see what a real socialist government is like. For all of their complaining about President Bush, they ain't seen nothing yet.
31 posted on 07/07/2003 10:52:09 PM PDT by ladyinred (The left have blood on their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

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

I agree, there is a lot at stake right now, I'm trying to hold in my anger over all his liberal moves and it is tough to watch the GOP act like democRATS.

Here's a high school pic of W.



Give me a Chad !
32 posted on 07/07/2003 10:53:36 PM PDT by John Lenin (Government does not solve problems, it subsidizes them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: duckln
Those of you, who can't see the differences, need cokebottle lenzed glasses. It's okay that YOU get what you desever; it isn't okay, that you often force that garbage on the rest of us.

And FYI ... Rush is a pompous, selfimportant little man, who hasn't been correct about much, in a very long time. His political views/opinions, are now ill concieved, phoned in, naieve, and have been, for years.

33 posted on 07/07/2003 10:56:23 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
The political naifs are hard at it. It's only going to get much worse, here, as the elecoral season gets into high geer.
34 posted on 07/07/2003 10:57:40 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS

I've got her The Hillary Trap, but Hell to Pay by Barbara Olson remains the definitive Hitlery tome.

Hitlery would like Bush to be defeated.


35 posted on 07/07/2003 11:07:51 PM PDT by PhilDragoo (Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin
I am old enough to have seen the tragic failures of too many of our Chief Executives. A month is a very long time in politics -- and, so is a year -- by a factor of 12.

I suspect that the body bags from Iraq will create enormous problems downstream for Bush unless things dramatically turn around; and from my exxperience in South East Asia in the 60's, I don't see that on the horizon.

Further, he dare not take his conservative base for granted. I voted (foolishly) for Perot, simply because Daddy had failed to fufill basic responsibilities in '90 and 91; literally dozed off, taking us all for granted.

This election is W's to toss away, but IMHO, Iraq can very well become a serious threat to his Presidency...and '04 is light years away on the crisis/calamity calendar.
36 posted on 07/07/2003 11:20:13 PM PDT by dk/coro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: nopardons; ladyinred
The political naifs are hard at it. It's only going to get much worse, here, as the elecoral season gets into high geer.

This figurative penis-swinging from the know-it-alls who think they're more ideologically pure than the president and morally superior to him, happens the third year into every presidency. In 1995, lots of liberals were bitching all over the nascent web and on Usenet about how Bill Clinton had "betrayed" them. Same thing with conservatives on Internet mailing lists, Usenet, Prodigy and Compuserve with Bush 41 in 1991, and on CompuServe and The Source with Reagan in 1983. All the holier-than-thou types always post their "open threats" that if President So-and-So doesn't "get his act together," they're going to vote for someone else the next year.

And every time, one of three things happens:

1) They meekly shut up and vote for the same president again the next year.

2) They follow through with their "threat" and vote for an irrelevant third party, and the president gets reelected anyway.

3) Rarely, a nascent third party with actual spoiler possibilities comes along, like Perot's Reform Party in 1992; all the bitchers and moaners jump on that bandwagon, and end up cutting off their noses to spite their faces as the candidate of the other party (that was Clinton, for those of you in Rio Linda or who admire the Constitution Party) sails to an easy victory.

And then who whines and complains the loudest for the next EIGHT YEARS about how the country's gone to hell in a handbasket? That's right; the people who chose option (3) and gave us Dr. Evil in the first place.

Thankfully, the only potential spoiler on the horizon for 2004 is once again our old buddy Ralph Nader and the Greens, who will only help the GOP. If anyone else here wants to go with option (2) in November 2004, be my guest.

(Ninety-eight percent of them, of course, will choose option (1) when they step into the voting booth, no matter what they may boast here afterwards.)

37 posted on 07/07/2003 11:27:28 PM PDT by Dont Mention the War
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Dont Mention the War
BRAVO ! Well said, absolutely, 100 % correct, and I couldn't have said it any better than you have. :-)
38 posted on 07/07/2003 11:30:41 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: MNLDS
Presidency of George W. Bush --the first 30 months
Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty.

Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court.

Killed the U.S. - CCCP ABM Treaty that was preventing the U.S. from deploying our ABM defenses.

Reversed Clinton's move to strike Reagan's anti-abortion Mexico Policy.

Killed Clinton's CO2 rules that were choking off all of the electricity surplus to California.

Killed Clinton's "ergonomic" rules that OSHA was about to implement; rules that would have shut down every home business in America.

Passed 2 tax cuts----1 of which was the largest tax-Dollar value tax cut in history

Pushed through TWO raises for our military.

Increased Defense Dept funding which had deteriorated during the previous 8 years

Signed TWO bills into law that arm our pilots with handguns in the cockpit

Currently pushing for full immunity from lawsuits for our national gun manufacturers.

Ordered Attorney-General Ashcroft to formally notify the Supreme Court that the OFFICIAL U.S. government position on the 2nd Amendment is that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, NOT a leftist-imagined "collective" right.

Successfully executed 2 wars: Afghanistan and Iraq. 50 million people who had lived under tyrannical regimes now live in freedom.

Changed the tone in the White House, restoring HONOR and DIGNITY to the Presidency

Reorganized bureaucracy...after 9/11, condensed 20+ overlapping agencies and their intelligence sectors into one agency: the Department of Homeland Security.

Initiated discussion on Social security and individual investment accounts.

Improving govt. efficiency with .8 million jobs put up for bid...weakening unions and cutting undeserved pay raises. Wants merit based promotions/raises only.

Executed a WAR ON TERROR by getting world-wide cooperation to track funds/terrorists (has cut off much of the terrorist's funding and captured or killed many key leaders of the al Qaeda network)

Stopped foreign aid that would be used to fund abortions.

Supported and upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals

Signed E.O. reversing Clinton policy of not requiring parental consent under the Medical Privacy Act

Told the United Nations we weren't interested in their plans for gun control.

Set to sign Partial Birth Abortion Ban

Orchestrated Republican control of the White House, the House AND the Senate.

Killed the liberal ABA's role in vetting federal judges for Congress.

GWB signed an executive order enforcing the Supreme Court's Beck decision (re: union dues being used for political campaigns against individual's wishes)

Brought back our EP-3 intel plane and crew from China without any bribes or bloodshed

Started withdrawing our troops from Bosnia and has announced withdrawal of our troops from Germany and the Korean DMZ.

Signed the LARGEST nuclear arms reduction in world history with Russia

Initiated comprehensive review of our military, which was completed just prior to 9/11/01, accurately reported that ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE was critical.

Has CONSTRUCTION in process on the first ten ABM silos in Alaska, so that America will have a defense against North Korean nukes

Turning around an inherited economy in recession.

Passed tough new laws to hold corporate criminals to account as a result of corporate scandals.

Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains

In process of eliminating IRS marriage penalty.

Increased small business incentives to expand and to hire new people

Signed into law the CFR legislation (under dark of night)

Signed into law the No Child Left Behind legislation delivering the most dramatic education reforms in a generation (challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations)

Reorganized the INS in an attempt to safeguard the borders and ports of America and to eliminate bureaucratic redundancies and lack of accountability.

Signed trade promotion authority

Committed US funds to purchase medicine for millions of men and women and children now suffering with AIDS in Africa

Urging Medicare Reform

Urging federal liability reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits

Supports class action reform bill which limits lawyer fees so that more settlement money goes to victims

Submitted comprehensive energy plan--awaits Congressional action. ( works to develop cleaner technology, produce more natural gas here at home, make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy)

Endorses and promotes The Responsibility Era ("In a compassionate society, people respect one another and take responsibility for the decisions they make in life. My hope is to change the culture from one that has said, if it feels good, do it; if you've got a problem, blame somebody else -- to one in which every single American understands that he or she are responsible for the decisions that you make; you're responsible for loving your children with all your heart and all your soul; you're responsible for being involved with the quality of the education of your children; you're responsible for making sure the community in which you live is safe; you're responsible for loving your neighbor, just like you would like to be loved yourself. " -----this quote was too good to leave out)

Started the USA Freedom Corps

Pushing for passage of Prescription Drug Benefit package for Seniors which will have 'means' testing

Pushing for privatization of Medicare and CHOICES based on current Federal Employee Health benefits program.

Initiated review of all federal agencies with a goal to eliminate federal jobs (review to be done by September 2003) in an effort to reduce the size of federal gov while increasing private sector jobs.

Part of coalition (Russia, Israel, Palestine, USA) for Israeli/Palestinian "Roadmap to Peace"

Challenged the United Nations to live up to their responsibilities and not become The League of Nations ( in other words, completely irrelevant)

Nominated strong, conservative judges to the judiciary.

Changed parts of the Forestry Management Act to allow necessary clean-up of the national forests in order to reduce fire danger.

As part of the national forests clean-up, the President restricted judicial challenges (based on the Endangered Species Act and other challenges) and removed the need for an EIS (Enivironmental Impact Statement) before removing fuels/logging to reduce fire danger.

Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops.

39 posted on 07/07/2003 11:36:21 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo
"Hitlery would like Bush to be defeated."

The joke is that Hillary just wants to screw Bush.

40 posted on 07/07/2003 11:37:11 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 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