George F. Will:President Bush has turned conservatism on its head, infuriating many supporters

The Union Leader, Manchester, NH ^ | July 24, 2003 | George F. Will

[RJCogburn]

THIS IS THE is the summer of conservatives? discontent. Conservatism has been disoriented by events in the last several weeks. Cumulatively, foreign and domestic developments constitute an identity crisis of conservatism, which is being recast ? and perhaps rendered incoherent.

George W. Bush may be the most conservative person to serve as President since Calvin Coolidge. Yet his Presidency is coinciding with, and is in some instances initiating or ratifying, developments disconcerting to four factions within conservatism. The faction that focuses on foreign policy has four core principles: Preserve U.S. sovereignty and freedom of action by marginalizing the United Nations. Reserve military interventions for reasons of U.S. national security, not altruism. Avoid peacekeeping operations that compromise the military?s war-fighting proficiencies. Beware of the political hubris inherent in the intensely unconservative project of ?nation-building.?

[MrLeRoy]

the real world WHERE things are FAR fropm perfect in ALL respect

And Dubya is making them even worse in many respects.

[_Jim]

    I find his show very entertaining and informative.

You mean self-promoting Alex 'buy my Videos and support me' Jones show is informative?

I think he does a GREAT disservice through the his rampant use of illogic, hyperbole and sensationalism.

I have YET to hear one cite (the actual citation of an article from a given publication) from him on the air as the basis for the incredible claims he makes, claims that ALWAYS slant towards the well-established one-world/ New World Order 'view' he has ...

He BLEW it regarding Y2K too BTW - were you aware of this? - completely BLEW it - no gov't takeovers, no seizure of power et cetera.

To the uneducated mind I guess this doesn't matter when such 'important matters' as freedom and liberty are 'at stake' as described by Jones.

[VRWC_minion]

Yeah, Papa Bush thought the same thing.

But Papa Bush ended the war, Son Bush didn't, he will keep it going for years.

Papa Bush wasn't attacked on US soil, Son Bush was.

Papa Bush raised taxes, Son Bush has lowered them twice.

When the checks go out this summer and next, the people will believe that Bush is doing what is possible.

[Area51]

Wow! Are you new to politics? 75 posted on 07/24/2003 7:21 AM PDT by carton253 (You are free to form your own opinions, but not your own facts.) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies | Report Abuse ] -------------------------

Nope. I can spot a Scammer a mile a way. I also can see the hypocrisy of those that just a few years ago openly attacked others for blindly supporting THEIR guy!

[Consort]

But they are the least among several evils, as you said should be supported.

Where did you get that idea? If they ever get power, they will quickly do what the major parties do to keep and grow that power — whatever it takes. Also, a third party will change the political dynamic and we will start to resemble some of the multi-party countries in Europe. It will result in more compromises, as in watering down and diluting legislation.

[_Jim]

And Dubya is making them even worse in many respects.

Another nattering naysayer of negativity ...

[Dane]

And Dubya is making them even worse in many respects.

Really? Huh I guess if that tax cuts, going after terrorists, killing Kyoto and the ICC etc. etc, is worse to you then I guess you would feel more at home at DU, since they think those issues are worse for the country.

DU is also for your dearest issue, drug validation.

[Viva Le Dissention]

The people are not going to change from someone they trust will get the terrorists to someone they don't know, regardless of the status of the economy.

Sure they will. Fact is, terrorism simply doesn't affect the daily lives of 260 million Americans, at least other than the effect terrorism has on the economy. The economy is always number one, and if it doesn't change for the better, 43 won't be sitting in the Oval Office come Jan of 05. Besides, the whole terrorism thing isn't going that hot, anyway--there are even members of the military complaining about being in Iraq, and these are volunteers!

Fact is, Bush better right the ship--and that includes the economy number one--otherwise it'll be Howard Dean or Edwards running the show next time around. Which, frankly, wouldn't be all that much of a change, except maybe slightly less funny.

[MrLeRoy]

"When President Reagan pursued his defense buildup, he increased real defense discretionary outlays by 19.2 percent while cutting non-defense discretionary outlays by 13.5 percent. However, if estimates hold, President Bush will have increased real defense discretionary outlays by 21.2 percent-but non-defense discretionary outlays will have risen by 18 percent. Discretionary spending numbers are telling because they are determined in the annual appropriations process where the President has the most influence.

"[...] Bush has not vetoed a single spending bill during his time in office. Instead, he has agreed to sign every piece of legislation crossing his desk, including a bloated farm bill and an intrusive education bill. In contrast, President Reagan vetoed 22 spending bills during his first three years in office.

"In addition, President Bush has been the beneficiary of a considerably more favorable party arrangement in Congress. Although Republicans did control the Senate during Reagan's first term, Democrats dominated the House-by a 100-seat margin at one point. President Bush on the other hand has had the luxury of a largely GOP- controlled Congress. While Reagan was sufficiently successful at taming a doubting and often hostile Congress, Bush has demonstrated a lack of conviction in tempering the spending desires of a comparatively receptive Hill." - http://www.cato.org/dailys/06-14-03.html

[carton253]

It was just that your little list contained pork. As if "pork" is the President's fault. There was money for worms long before this President... there will be money for worms long after he is gone.

It doesn't make it right. It's just the way Washington works.

[MrLeRoy]

And Dubya is making them even worse in many respects.

Really?

Yes; see post #89.

[MrLeRoy]

If they ever get power, they will quickly do what the major parties do to keep and grow that power

Where did you get that idea?

[Consort]

Compassionate Conservatism is nothing more than Socialism lite.

And who is going to do any better?

[_Jim]

   in this context, your point is irrelevant, and you have failed to address my point

WOULD Algore have had the cajones to take the stance, to take the leadership position that Bush has on world terrorism?

No.

To quote Ann Coulter: "You need to write your congressman and express your views - you can't expect the president to do everything" regarding the myriad of 'issues' that people take contention with the president over ...

You ARE familiar with how the legislative process works - aren't you?

[MrLeRoy]

And who is going to do any better?

The Constitution Party.

[Consort]

You know as well as I do that it will happen that way.

[Dane]

Democrats dominated the House-by a 100-seat margin at one point.

Yep. During the first two years of the Reagan administration Reagan had a working majority, with the boll weevil democrats.

That changed in the mid terms of 82 when the Pubbies lost 26 seats.

Also Reagan had a Seante majority for 6 years and not the razor thin margin Bush has right now, nor the demo control for half of the first two years of the Seante in Bush's term.

Oh well you quoted the Cato Institute, they never spin do they.

[_Jim]

Instead, he has agreed to sign every piece of legislation crossing his desk, including a bloated farm bill and an intrusive education bill.

Are you familar with how the legislative process works?

HOW did this/these bills arrive on his desk?

Hmmm?

[Consort]

You have to get off the third rate third party kick. It ain't happening.