Bush's Record Calls into Question His Conservative Label

The American Partisan ^ | June 5, 2002 | David T. Pyne

[Ben Ficklin]

I really hate to bring it up to you, but this thread seems to be drifting off-topic.

What started out as a perfectly good Bush Bashing thread has now turned into something where the fringe groups are bashing each other.

Don't ya'll have any sense of unity?

[dead]

We're all off our ritalin and can't focus.

[Scholastic]

Those that arnt paying attention that is.

[Ben Ficklin]

Sentry, would you mind stepping in here. This rightwing dude knows nothing about running a Bush Bash thread!

[Howlin]

Plus 90 percent of us approve of Bush; you're totally irrelevant, which I suspect is what bothers you the most.

[Howlin]

LOL!

[kidao35]

Pollsters, AP, and Newsday...nuff said.

[Southack]

I don't see GWB's actions as protecting Arafat so much as protecting Israel from an even worse opponent. Who would you propose to replace Arafat as the Palestinian leader?

On the other hand, I view Buchanon's calls for Arafat's ally Castro to be aided by lifting the Cuban embargo as a call for an action that harms Israel directly, as Cuba is where Palestinians are recieving their explosives training.

[caddie]

Since you said that I have so far to go, I thought I would get started right away, Thomas.

Below is a quote from a letter written by you (Thomas Jefferson) in 1807, to a man named Gallatin, IN WHICH YOU ADVOCATE A TARIFF ON CHEAP WINES, TO PROTECT DOMESTIC WINEMAKING.

(You used to make wine and collect it, I believe, so this is sort a special interest issue, it seems.)

I got it from www.memory.loc.gov, the excellent collection of digitized images of handwritten documents by you and the other founding fathers.

I gave you, some time ago, a project of a more equal tariff on wines than that which now exists. But in that I yielded considerably to the faulty classification of them in our law. I have now formed one with attention, and according to the best information I possess, classing them more rigorously. I am persuaded that were the duty on cheap wines put on the same ratio with the dear, it would wonderfully enlarge the field of those who use wine, to the expulsion of whiskey. The introduction of a very cheap wine (St. George) into my neighborhood, within two years past, has quadrupled in that time the number of those who keep wine, and will ere long increase them tenfold. This would be a great gain to the treasury, & to the sobriety of our country. I will here add my tariff, wherein you will be able to chuse any rate of duty you please, and to decide whether it will not, on a fit occasion, be proper for legislative attention. Affectn salutns.

Anyway, I would love to post the .jpg file, but I don't know how -- seriously, if you are not too p*$$ed about my posts you could tell me how.

Thought you would like to know about this 180 on your part.

Regards, caddie :-)

[P.S.: I think your petty moralizing, by trying to micromanage the drinking habits of the colonists, forcing them to drink more wine than whiskey, is Big Government Nannyism in the modern Rat tradition, don't you agree?]

[Southack]

"Sort of the same thing with Bush. He has shown he is not a conservative."

In what wierd world do you live where killing the Left-Wing Kyoto Treaty, pulling the U.S. out of the Socialist-dominated International Criminal Court, and killing the U.S. - CCCP ABM Treaty aren't Conservative?

Two tax cuts, both signed by Bush, one for businesses and the other for individuals, are hardly unConservative, either.

In case you haven't noticed, Bush has secured funding for our national missile defense, too.

You discredit yourself when you label those actions as not being Conservative...

[MeekOneGOP]

The article posted in #3 by Howlin is pretty good. The article originally posted here is so slanted and so anti-Bush, it could have been written by Bill Kristol himself I think. (Actually, Kristol would have given Bush a LOT more credit, on second thought!) Notice that the original article claims big loss of support of the conservative base? Wrong. He is VERY strong among conservatives, as stated in #3 by Howlin's article:

Bush's job approval rating among Republicans is in the low 90s and a bit higher among strong Republicans, according to an Ipsos-Reid poll and others.

Also I noticed that the ONLY mention of Bush's BIG focus (the War on Terror regarding WTC) was THIS:

.......the Bush Administration actually tried to enlist Iran, listed by the State Department as the greatest state sponsor of terror including Al Queda, as a strategic partner to fight terrorism back in September.

Those two things there prompt me to give this article a zero on a scale of 1 to 10, LOL!
Thanks for posting that on #3 so quickly, Howlin!

[weikel]

Bump I loved the guy during his 1st year but this recent leftward tilt disgust me.

[The Old Hoosier]

Unfortunately, that's the way the Senate is now and has always been--infested with moderate Republicans. But those moderates will vote for judicial nominees, which is arguably the most important thing about Bush's presidency. Also, they're more likely to provide cover for the phase-out of Social Security, national missile defense, etc.

But let's look at the candidates: One moderate running this year is Ganske (RINO-Iowa). I still hope he beats Harkin (anyone's better than him) but he won't. Norm Coleman (MN) is more on the moderate-conservative end, based on his record--but not a RINO, and I think he'll win. As for Dole and Alexander--she's posturing to the right, and will probably vote to the right as well, but not because of any innate beliefs she has. She'll be an 85 on the ACU ranking, is my prediction. Lamar is "sort of" moderate, but he's actually, in my opinion, more conservative than Fred Thompson, so no loss there--and we could even get Ed Bryant, though I doubt it. Cornyn is a conservative. Forrester (NJ) is a RINO, but at least he's good on immigration. Chambliss (Ga.) has a good record in the House, as does Thune (SD), as does Sununu (NH) (although it's a shame to see Bob Smith go).

So all in all, you're losing two conservatives and one moderate in retirement, and getting one conservative and two moderates to replace them.

You also have a conservative replacing a conservative through the primary (NH).

Then you have three conservatives trying to replace Democrats (two will succeed), and two moderates trying to replace democrats (NJ and IA, both will fail). So if you want me guesstimate, I think we'll have a net gain of conservatives, especially if Hutchinson hangs on in Arkansas--which he will.

[Protagoras]

I thought you had figured out by now that I am not the Thomas Jefferson to whom you refer. The one to whom you refer made plenty of mistakes. Setting tarriffs to protect domestic industry was one of them. He can be forgiven however since most of the important work on economics which shows the folly of these policies had yet to be done or widely published at the time.

As to the JPG posting, I'm not angry at you at all. Like Jefferson, you can't be blamed for being ignorant about things which you haven't been taught.

If you go to my profile page you will find a link to a HTML tutorial, it will contain the information you request.

[weikel]

Neither Bush nor Buchanan is a conservative Buchanan is a socialist and so apparently is Bush.

[rmlew]

Single question polls are irrelevent.

I am furious with Bush but if polled would say that I support him. The reason is that any fall in support pushes Bush to the LEFT.

A useful poll would ask questions about issues.

[Dane]

What started out as a perfectly good Bush Bashing thread has now turned into something where the fringe groups are bashing each other.

Don't ya'll have any sense of unity?

Shhh, good conservative polices can get done when the purists are at each others throats.