Powerful Letter About Bush and Conservatives

National Review -- The Corner ^ | 9/8/2003 | John Cafardi

[Political Numbers Guy]

ON THE OTHER HAND [Jonah Goldberg]

A reader warns that we shouldn't be too hard on Bush lest we face the alternative:

Jonah,

I am a 25 year old medical student (4th year) at Penn, and have followed your writing over the last three years. I greatly appreciate your ability to communicate fundamental (but often unspoken) arguments, and your advice on challenging cliches has helped me make sense of much of the intellectual mush I've been fed over the last several years.

With all this in mind, I am honestly very frightened when I hear key conservative voices talking about President Bush in this way. I understand that many of his policies are nearly anathema to our viewpoints (steel tarriffs, campaign finance reform, unwillingness to fight for his conservative judicial nominees, the early suggstions for illegal immigrant amnesty). However, I am not sure if we appreciate how truly dangerous the alternatives are. Here in the halls of the nation's first school of medicine (founded by, among others, Benjamin Rush, Washington's physician, and signer of the Declaration of Independence) I hear otherwise rational, logical people become so choked with rage and indignation when they hear the name of GWB. Their positions are so far away from where we are now, it is unbelieveable. Forget the Medicare drug benefit - they would not be satisfied until we have developed full NHS-style socialized medicine (this is the example I am most familiar with). The ideas on defense and law enforcement would leave us more vulnerable than ever to those who would just as gladly kill us as look at us.

I understand that many are disappointed by policies and positions of our President. That's OK - it will happen, regardless of who occupies the office. It just seems that those who talk about the president "losing his base" are displaying the mentality of a toddler who can't play the game he wants to: I'm taking my toys and going home; the rest of you are on your own.

The president is in a position that I do not, and never would, envy. The war he has to lead will last the remainder of our lives (I hope they are long) and I am certain that there are compromises that must be made to reach the final objective. Let's not lose sight of that, and let's not cut the president down over peripheral issues, at the expense of the crux of the matter: Keeping us alive, and preserving our civilization. If he does that, he has certainly not "jumped the shark".

Sincerely,

John Cafardi
Philadelphia

[Political Numbers Guy]

This powerful letter that appeared on National Review's blog puts it perfectly: We as conservatives should not lose sight of what is at stake in the war on terrorism, and not fall prey to the temptation of taking shots at Bush over other less important issues.

The URL to link to this piece, which I highly recommend, is: http://www.nationalreview.com/thecorner/03_09_07_corner-archive.asp#013148

Let me know if you'd like on or off the blogging ping list.

[wretchard]

The US military performance has been superlative, but the fighters on the home front have been less impressive. Our websites, blogs, College Republican clubs, etc have not performed as impressively against the ACLU, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times etc as one would have wished. We are all busy with our day jobs and can't spare the time to counter the Liberals.

But we are shocked, absolutely shocked, that the President has to compromise conservative principles to special interest groups of various kinds in order to line up support to get say, $87 billion to fight Al-Qaeda globally. It is unconscionable. We will continue to support our troops by posting messages to the Internet, but as for anything more demanding, like voting for candidates who won't backstab the troops, well, we need to send the message that conservatives won't go along unconditionally, don't we?

[185JHP]

leave me on, and blog at will. Thanks.

[exnavy]

I don't find this letter "powerful", I find it sad.

I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK FROM ALL THE DOUBLE TALKING LOWLIFE POLITICOS NO MATTER THE PARTY!!!!!!

Sorry, I lost control, I think I'll be alright ...

[RJCogburn]

Well, I hope that if I become ill I shall not have the soon to be Doctor Carfardi rendering my care. His thinking is superficial and emotional.

[Timesink]

Let me know if you'd like on or off the blogging ping list.

I'd like on it, please.

[MeekOneGOP]

The president is in a position that I do not, and never would, envy. The war he has to lead will last the remainder of our lives (I hope they are long) and I am certain that there are compromises that must be made to reach the final objective. Let's not lose sight of that, and let's not cut the president down over peripheral issues, at the expense of the crux of the matter: Keeping us alive, and preserving our civilization. If he does that, he has certainly not "jumped the shark".

Thanks ! Great post ! ...

November, 2004:
President Bush on the Road to Victory ...

[TopQuark]

His thinking is superficial and emotional. The harshness of your criticism only puts into question your own abilities, Mr. Cogburn. This is a letter, not an article. The author may have given permission afterwards but did not originally intend it for publication.

The standards with which you judge the letter are entirely inappropriate thus.

I am certainly glad not be receiving and letters from you: why would I read a letter completely devoid of feeling and emotion?

[rdb3]

We will continue to support our troops by posting messages to the Internet, but as for anything more demanding, like voting for candidates who won't backstab the troops, well, we need to send the message that conservatives won't go along unconditionally, don't we?

Not voting or voting the wrong way would probably lead to stabbing our servicemen in the back.

[raybbr]

Hasn't GW changed hats:

[freekitty]

Great letter.

One of the things I admire about Bush is he is able to look at the end result, the big picture, and make a decision. He doesn't get stuck in the process while Cinton almost always gets stuck in the process and goes off on some tangent, usually unable to make a decision. Clinton may be intellectually smart; but he is no leader. I don't believe he can delegate either.

[RJCogburn]

This is a letter, not an article.

And....?

why would I read a letter completely devoid of feeling and emotion?

For ideas, perhaps.

[foreverfree]

bump

[TopQuark]

One of these days, you should fall in love, Mr. Cogburn.

Write letters to your beloved. Jot down a word or two to your friends and tell them you miss them.

Read and write letters to express your feeling --- you do have them, don't you? For ideas, refer to something like "Algebraic Topology" and "Relatistic Quantum Mechanics" instead (any author is fine).

[sausageseller]

Powerful letter?

Not in my book!

Powerful=" peripheral issues, at the expense of the crux of the matter:"

How many issues does it take for them not to be considered "petipheral"

The writer needs to attend a "Young Republicans" meeting on campus and become educated!

His letter borders on Jr. Highish.

[sausageseller]

t=r

A Jr.High keyboarding class is in order.