Posted on 04/10/2002 10:27:24 AM PDT by Risky Schemer
(The following is PARAPHRASED - not exact quotes, from a discussion that covered a couple of segments.)
Rush got a caller during the last part of the first hour of his show, who wanted to complain about Rush's "Bush bashing."
"You're always bashing Bush. Every time I tune in you are bashing Bush," the caller said. Rush protested, "Not every time."
The caller said,"You've criticized him on campaign finance reform, the education bill, taxes, Israel policy . . . I just don't think that now, since we have a conservative in office, that we ought to be giving the left material they can use against him in the nest elections - 'Look, Bush let you down . . .'. You don't believe Bush should compromise, that it's necessary?"
Rush said, "I've said before, I'm all for compromise when it advances the conservative agenda. I am tired of compromise that advances the liberal agenda."
Rush then asked the caller, "What is my job here?" Rush then explained his job was not to act as a mouthpiece for the Republican party, but to advance conservatism and resist liberalism.
"Look," Rush said, "Bush said he was opposed to campaign finance reform, said it was wrong, and then he signed it. During his campaign he said he that Jerusalem should be the capital of Israel and now he has come out for a Palestinian state."
"Let me ask you something, all you people who think I am Bush bashing. What if it were Clinton. What would you people be calling me about now?"
Not to worry, come election time, Rush will be acting as a mouthpiece of the GOP again.
Gore? You would have an idiot that dyes his hair.
he likes ratings...
I disagree with Bush on the first two - probably on the second two as well (at least with his public positions).
That doesn't mean I am not glad Bush is President. I am still proud of him and support him. We have gotten so caught up in destruction politics that we have forgotten that it is ok to disagree with someone on an issue - that is what debate is for (or used to be for.)
Americans didn't elect the man because of his personal charm, but to stand for certain principles and to put them into action. If we approve of everything he does, regardless of whether or not it's in line with the principles we were led to believe he shared with us, how are we different from the lefties who cheered Clinton on regardless of everything he did?
George W. Bush is an enormous improvement over Bill Clinton, and I'm glad to have him in the Oval Office... which doesn't mean I'm not going to hold him to his word. Having a lot of conservatives scowling at him when he departs from conservative principles could well help to keep him faithful to those principles. Getting nothing but approval, in contrast, could persuade him that it doesn't matter what policies he adopts.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com
1) We would have immediately surrendered to the Taliban and sent them lots of money. Oprah WOULD have gone to Afghan to help them with their self esteem
2) Sharon would not have been allowed to do the incursions in the first place. Clinton and halfbright would have passed UN resolutions stopping Isereal. If that didn't work Clinton would have international peace keepers (under our ) lead controlling Isereal under Yasser wishes
3) An SUV 'luxury' tax of 1000/per car/per year would be assessed to end dependence on foreign oil
4) More nuke tech would go to chinese, so that they could help Syria, Saudi Arabia and North Korea round out their arms
PS sorry about the formatting. My only request for FR would be to add the ability to show the ascii character #13
I wish he had remembered this before the election.
I'm with Rush.
That being said, Rush has not been elected to anything. He's not the President, he's not a Senator, he's not anything but, by his own admission, a radio personality, part educator, part entertainer.
As far as the Middle East goes, it's easy to say how things should be, what you would do, etc. etc., it's easy to criticize. But who knows what you would do if you were in Bush's shoes. We don't know the whole story; we don't see the whole picture; we are not briefed every morning. We see what the media feeds us. We listen to others' accounts of what is happening.
I prefer to trust Bush, keep my mouth shut and see what transpires. If when all is said and done Bush blows it, I'll be the first to admit it, but we're in the middle of the mess, so give the guy sometime to work it out.
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.