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?"
I fear for it too.
But I do think that when (note, I am saying when and not if) the Republicans take back control of the Senate, things will be much different. If not, perhaps I will start beating the drums of discontent too. Until then, I will agree with the following:
So let us be grateful for President Bush. Let us not take him for granted. When I see the president engaging, here and there, in the inevitable compromise, although I sometimes look on with disappointment, and certainly reserve my right to criticize, for the most part I am mindful of how very important it is for American conservatives to have this fine and far too easily underestimated man firmly ensconced in the highest office in the land. ~ Stanley Kurtz, National Review Online
Thank you for the civil debate, BTW. It is appreciated.
They keep him as a RHINO, so that 'bipartisan' committees can be formed, on important issues.
I wish we did that more often with our DINO, Zell Miller.
The evil party is just plain smarter than the stupid party! =)
I disagree. Their crying would have made a difference. Their crying would lead every major newscast and be the topic of every network talk show. The Republicans' knees knock in fear at the thought. At least, that's the impression one gets.
There's something about being inside the Beltway. Maybe it's the water. I'm not too sure it would be much different if the Republicans controlled everything.
GW is working to get a majority in both the house and senate as well as a second term. His strategy is to take away all the traditional RAT issues and leave them in disarray. It is working. Once we have the house, the senate and presidency, you will see GW true conservative colors. Right now, with the RATS holding the senate, we can't even get a judge approved. BE PATIENT! Remember Ali's rope-a-dope.
Richard W.
If Mr. Bush was truly pro-life and a statesman, he would end abortion now by just not enforcing it.
When the next dictionary comes out, next to the word "optimist" there definitely should be a picture of you, sir Richard. =)
Yes, I am an optimist and I'm probably rationalizing a little too. We'll know more about where we're going after Nov. I hope that I'm right 'cause I'm going to be one PO'ed optimist if not.
Richard W.
I've been around this block with the Bushies: Bush needs to (1) stop giving our tax money to population controllers (never happen -- it's a Bush family thing), and (2) enforce existing OSHA regulations concerning blood-borne pathogens at abortion clinics. The best that can be hoped for is that Bush stays out of the way.
If Gore was president, we'd all be hectored on a daily basis to "understand the plight" of the terrorists and suicide bombers. He would have been lecturing us about how the talibastards are just "different" than we are. Not evil, not worse than us -- just "different."
I don't like what I hear bush saying, and I fully agree with rush, based on what I know... but with the caveat that I don't know what President Bush does... and we may be in deeper shit than we can dig ourselves out of, without experiencing a LOT of pain, and loss.
I have to wait and see. While we bitchout the Israelis... we also send them the messages that we will in NO case stop or even THREATEN to reduce or restrict the flow of munitions, materiels, food, money, military intelligence or anything of the sort... NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO... To me that means, we are saying one thing for arabic consumption worldwide, while doing another in reality... and simply riding out the "window of vulnerability" we are sitting in front of, till we can recover what Willie the sinkmaster, did when he eviscerated the CIA,FBI, DIA, NSA the navy, marines, army and air forces of the nation whose military he "loathed" to put it nicely.
WE also have to realise that while evisceration went on in national defense, Clinton did EVERY THING he could to transfer our military secrets to his Communist Friends worldwide.
Bush may be looking at "annihilation" scenarios right now that would put things in an entirely different perspective than we are publicly putting forward... I hope not but I fear so.
If we are vulnerable, Bush is wise to stall and delay, until we are strong enough to fight and WIN... after all, what good would it be if we were nuked in three or four population centers, within moments of our incursions into Iraq, Iran, or the other AXIS member we all KNOW is in this up to their chopsticks.???
We need to wait, and see... if Bush actually backs Israel, (where it counts, with dollars, weapons and intelligence backup) or not. WE have to wait. We have no other option.
In electing public officials, the only choices we EVER get are the least evil of those who are electable. If you don't like it, who does? If you do not participate, or vote for someone who is non-electable, then you are only helping to elect the greater evil, making you an evil-doer.
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.