Ingraham: Bush Not Invincible

www.lauraingraham.com ^ | July 7, 2003 | Laura Ingraham

[Wild Irish Rogue]

" 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."

Rush said that if the Prescription Drug Bill is signed into law- he hopes the Republicans lose the House.What a jaw dropping statement,during a time of war.I guess we can assume that he also hopes the Republicans lose the Senate and the WH.I fully expect to read somewhere soon,that Rush is leaving the Republican Party, ala,Pat Buchanan. You know Rush's old " Ted Kennedy wrote the Education Bill" mantra ? From USA Today,June 13,2001-Ted Kennedy on the Education Bill, "It isn't the bill I would have preferred." Well now, how could Ted Kennedy have "written the Education Bill" and then said that?? These armchair legislators and Presidents give me a pain,with their constant whining and moaning. I saw Gen Tommy Franks speak today and not a moan or a whine out of him,just a lot of "Bring It Ons" and gratefulness that George Bush is our President.He wasn't curled into a fetal position over the possibility of a prescription drug bill, like so many others.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

" 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."

Rush said that if the Prescription Drug Bill is signed into law- he hopes the Republicans lose the House.What a jaw dropping statement,during a time of war.I guess we can assume that he also hopes the Republicans lose the Senate and the WH.I fully expect to read somewhere soon,that Rush is leaving the Republican Party, ala,Pat Buchanan. You know Rush's old " Ted Kennedy wrote the Education Bill" mantra ? From USA Today,June 13,2001-Ted Kennedy on the Education Bill, "It isn't the bill I would have preferred." Well now, how could Ted Kennedy have "written the Education Bill" and then said that?? These armchair legislators and Presidents give me a pain,with their constant whining and moaning. I saw Gen Tommy Franks speak today and not a moan or a whine out of him,just a lot of "Bring It Ons" and gratefulness that George Bush is our President.He wasn't curled into a fetal position over the possibility of a prescription drug bill, like so many others.

[KC_Conspirator]

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."

What do you expect? For him to rant and rave about how outrageous this decision is? He is the president for crying out loud. Leave the outrage on matters like that to talking heads, pundits, and activists. Hey, I am all for a Constitutional ban on gay marraige (if you can call it that), but I don't expect Bush to lead the charge and he can't help with Supreme Court judges who were put on the bench by someone else.

However, I am a little disgruntled on many issues that Bush is passing; like the spending on education bill, farm bill, and prescription drugs. The economy also needs fixing or its going to fix him in the election.

[nopardons]

I started listening to Rush in '89. He was good; not great, but good. Until he married Marta, he had a fire in his belly, really didn't take himself as seriously as he later did, and was NOT the pompous blowhard that his detractors made him out to be. Then he married Marta. Instead of reading his eyes out, being glued to the computer, and never enjoying what N.Y.C. had to offer ( he really was worse than just a provincial hick, he was a pathetic hermit...but at least he had an avocation ), he began to allow her to drag him around and they attempted to " belong " to society.

BOOM ! Rush's ego ballooned as his weight fell. He stopped doing research, he heavily relied on Newt for not only " inside scoops ", but for his opinions. He decided that he, Rush, was the be all and end all and didn't have to really even read, think, or anything much, but talk about himself and granstand. He became a bloated egotist, a contemptable blowhard, and worthless. What he became, is a far worse cartoon character, than even his opponents had made him out to be.

Several years ago, during continua, ongoing Clinto scandals, he spent the better part of three, T-H-R-E-E whole days, talking about tor fungus. TOE FUNGUS !

He's only gotten worse since then and I can no longer listen to him.

You get it. You know what's what, and thanks for the salient points you've made.

[PhilDragoo]

The joke is that Hillary just wants to screw Bush.

Now that double entendre has been broached, this from Gennifer Flowers, Passion & Betrayal, Emery Dalton, 1995, page 41:

The time Bill and I had together was too precious to waste talking about his wife, but when I heard some rumors floating around Little Rock, I had to speak up. He was with me at home one evening, and I cautiously told him, "There's something you need to know. I've been hearing tales around town that Hillary is having a thing with another woman." I watched his face to see his reaction, and couldn't believe it when he burst out laughing. I was stunned! I asked him what was so funny. "Honey," he said, "she's probably eaten more p---y than I have."

[EGPWS]

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

And when we needed him the most!

I understand the frustration however it is because of a very short memory for some. It was a long hard battle to just be elected for Dubya' and if he would have lost the election, these grumblings of his "going soft" on conservatism would be a welcome grumble to the grumblers, considering who we could have had for POTUS.

[Tall_Texan]

Absolutely right. All it will really take for GWB to hold most of the conservative base is to spout some red meat and talk about his Christian values during the primary season. A few will jump off the reservation but most are going to stay. I know that's a cynical way of looking at things but this is the political reality. Conservatives *have* nowhere else to go in numbers sufficient to swing the election and any swinging they would do is only going to benefit our enemies and not our causes. We have no choice but to dance with who brung us, much as we hate to believe it.

I HOPE Bush is just trying to build a strong enough majority that he doesn't have to cater to the RINOs but you must remember that I watched him as Governor of Texas for six years and his governing style was the same here as it is in Washington - he embraces the left and tries to win them over while trying to hold a firm grasp of the center. He'll spout enough conservatism to keep the hard-liners in line but it rarely winds up in conservatives getting what they really want.

The scary part to me is that the GOP is becoming ideologically reflective of Bush rather than just accepting of him. I'm glad there are still Republicans in the House that oppose him on things like AWB and prescription drug handouts but I find little in the Senate to encourage me.

Even a supermajority in the House and Senate is not going to bring about a conservative Nirvana. The best we conservatives will *ever* get, even in a perfect situation, is only about half of what we want.

It's sad and frustrating that the liberals continue to win even while their party loses but that's exactly what stares us in the face and the only way it's going to change is when the entitlement crowd and the government largesse crowd dies off and those growing up behind them realize they've been footing the bill for the freeloaders all these years and decide to pull the plug. That won't happen until long after I'm dead if it ever happens at all.

In short, all the bellyaching about Bush not being conservative enough to hold his base is just BS. We have nowhere else to go.

[GmbyMan]

Great Freakin' post!

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We are engaged in a war of ideas right now. The left is on one side and the right is on the other. You have to pick a side and stay on it. There are only two political parties in this country and there ALWAYS have been. The way to enact change within a political party is WITHIN that party. No one ever changed a party by leaving it. I, too, have some reservations with some of the things that Bush has done. I've said this before. I have three things I look for in a President:

1)How's he doing on foreign affairs, particularly when it comes to military spending and how he uses the military?

2)How good is he at returning confiscated tax revenue?

3)How good is he at reducing the size of social spending in the Federal Government?

Of these three things, I give Bush an A, A and C. Rather than focus on the poor grade, why not concentrate on the positives. What Democrat is going to cut taxes and use the military as effectively as President Bush? I can't name one either.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

" What he became, is a far worse cartoon character, than even his opponents had made him out to be."

Can't disagree with anything you've said. I really used to enjoy his show,but,since Bush was inaugurated,it's been a constant drumbeat of negativity.I don't know anyone who still listens to him, I can't believe that he is attracting more listeners than he is driving away. Anyone who bought into the left's description of Rush as an angry,bitter, hater, would have had that opinion validated,in the past 2 years, on any number of shows.As disappointed as I am in Rush for his slanted presentation of President Bush's views, I also find it sad that he will probably end his radio career,on such a sour note.

[nopardons]

The fact of the matter is, President Bush the younger, isn't any less Conservative than President Reagan. Politics is now and has always been, the realm of the possible ... not " I'll wave a magic wand and give my base everything they ever imagined they wanted ."

[nopardons]

Actually, Rush's slide and negativity( not to mention his egomania ) goes back farther than two years. It's only gotten much more noticeable, since Bush was elected.

I'm glad I'm not alone here, Many FREEPERs, unfortunately , still are rather blinkered, where Rush is concerned. I worry about them.

[185JHP]

IMO George the First lost enough votes with his nasty, sellout firearms import ban to cost him his reelection. The cynical "sell out a lot of your base to entice the squishball middle" calculus didn't work. Sadly W seems to be listening to some of his nastiest advisers a little too much.

[Tall_Texan]

The fact of the matter is, President Bush the younger, isn't any less Conservative than President Reagan. Politics is now and has always been, the realm of the possible ... not " I'll wave a magic wand and give my base everything they ever imagined they wanted ."

I disagree to a point. I think Reagan *was* more conservative and the gains he got came through a Democrat House and sometimes a Democrat Senate. Reagan truly believed in scaling back government even though his efforts were largely unsuccessful. I never hear Bush talk about scaling back government and I don't believe, by his actions, that he believes in it. He talks about privatising some government functions but outsourcing government isn't the same as cutting it.

The irony is that *Jeb* was considered the more conservative and more appealing of the two Bush brothers and had the greater chance to one day become president but Jeb stumbled against Lawton Chiles while George beat Ann Richards so George got on the fast track ahead of Jeb.

I don't hate George. I accept him for what he is - a slightly right-of-center moderate who is more fiscal conservative than moral conservative. In this day and age, that's probably as good as we can elect nationwide. But George is no Reagan, and neither was his dad.

[Tall_Texan]

What happened to Bush 41 was Perot, not some exodus from the right. The gadfly drew the diasaffected and he played the populist tune to draw voters from both directions - that was enough to give the government over to Clinton.

As long as no Perots are on the horizon, what screwed his father won't screw him.

[nopardons]

I never claimed that Bush the elder was Reaganesque. OTOH, I think that you are somewhat seeing Reagan through rose colored galsses.

[Tall_Texan]

Reagan was the *bane* of most RINOs when he ran for President and then governed as president. They seethed that he wasn't more moderate. When was the last time you heard a RINO complaining that Bush 43 was too conservative - other than McCain (and with McCain, it's personal, not politics)?

[185JHP]

You could be right - but IMO a lot of Perot votes were anti-George the First votes, not "I really like Perot" votes. I'm firmly in the "we lost in '92 because we didn't have a good enough candidate" group. FReegards

[nopardons]

I heard a LOT of Conservatives, during the Reagan presidency, moaning and groaning about how " moderate " he was. It is only now, that Reagan has attained Conservative godhood.

[proud American in Canada]

Re #39: GW BUMP!

[nopardons]

Great list and one, his detractors can't smear; but, will try to.