Bush's Record Calls into Question His Conservative Label

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

[JohnGalt]

David T. Pyne, Esq. is a national security expert who works as an International Programs Manager in the Department of the Army

The author draws a government check from a branch of the government that lives in the glass houses of all glass houses. I actually thought Bush's disarmament move was decent politics; I have read that no one knows whether these missiles still work or not because we haven't been allowed to test them in almost 30 years. Better to scrap the 75% that don't work and focus on the trusted 25% all the while quieting the reactionary anti-anti-Communist Left.

My disagreements with Bush's policy is that he is an accountant of the welfare state, not a visionary.

[rightwing2]

The author draws a government check from a branch of the government that lives in the glass houses of all glass houses. I actually thought Bush's disarmament move was decent politics; I have read that no one knows whether these missiles still work or not because we haven't been allowed to test them in almost 30 years. Better to scrap the 75% that don't work and focus on the trusted 25% all the while quieting the reactionary anti-anti-Communist Left.

Now, you are bad mouthing the US Army? What is your rationale for doing so? Do you agree with egghead Steven Cambone from the Department of Defense that the US no longer needs to maintain a conventional army and that airpower reigns supreme? Better to scrap the 75% of our nukes that don't work, you say? I guess that is why Bush decided to scrap all of our newest and most powerful, most accurate missiles, the MX Peacekeeper, and keep the 30 plus year old, long obselescent Minuteman III missiles left over from Nixon's first term. Yep, great policy on Bush's part. Scrap the new stuff and keep the old stuff that probably won't work, then promise the Russians that our yet-to-be built missile defense system won't work against the Russian missile threat. That way the Russkies will feel less threatened. I'm real glad we now have "adult" leadership at the White House. Makes me sleep better at night. Yeah, right...

[caddie]

rw2: I bought most of Sowell's books, and have gotten through his autobiography, and can't wait to get to the green book, his basic economics text.

The best thing about Sowell is his fantastic sense of humor, which is so buried in the truth that it is sublime.

hannosh4LtGovernor: Saw your site, good luck, I think you are going to win. The people of your state are dying for a person to lead who is an unashamed Christian, who loves the founding Fathers, and who will educate them about how America came to be.

Who is the Clay dude you guys are talking about?

[JohnGalt]

The US Army's Delta Force, murdered children at Waco.

The US Air Force dropped bombs on Orthdox Christians on Easter Sunday on a soveriegn nation without a Declaration of War.

The US Navy obeyed immoral orders and fired cruise missiles on Aug 18, 1998, the same day Monica testified in front of the Grand Jury; they blew up an asprin factory and set in motion a chain of events that included first the suicide attack on the USS Cole and eventually the WTC attack, 9/11/02.

I know, I know, they were just following orders...

[rightwing2]

The US Army's Delta Force, murdered children at Waco. The US Air Force dropped bombs on Orthdox Christians on Easter Sunday on a soveriegn nation without a Declaration of War. The US Navy obeyed immoral orders and fired cruise missiles on Aug 18, 1998, the same day Monica testified in front of the Grand Jury; they blew up an asprin factory and set in motion a chain of events that included first the suicide attack on the USS Cole and eventually the WTC attack, 9/11/02. I know, I know, they were just following orders...

Hey, hey there. I agree with everything you wrote here. I was just trying to find out what your allegation of "the greatest national security failure in history" was--something you have yet to divulge. I'm not saying that criticizing the armed forces is not fair game, although with the exception of the Delta Force jack-booted thugs, I hardly blame the members of uniformed services for following the orders of their Commander-in-Chief even if it was Bill Clinton.

[JohnGalt]

9/11 is the national security blunder I am referring too. There has yet to be a high level resignation; lots of finger pointing very little responsibility.

My intention was not to impeach the entire US armed forces, which I should have made clear, only that Conservatives should not make the mistake of confusing the defense apparatus (military and intelligence) with Conservative principals.

Again, I am challenging an author who works for the government in the "national security" industry and can still claim to be a national security expert w/o blushing, who is advising a hawkish stance towards Palestine and Iraq, whilst supporting an inconsequential steel tariff to thwart "dumping."

[1rudeboy]

paragraph 5: President Bush has undertaken a major effort to remake the GOP in "his" image, alienating many of his conservative supporters in the process. [emphasis added]
last paragraph: He may need to do so in order to regain lost conservative support and avoid a major conservative challenge in the 2004 presidential election. [emphasis added]

The text does not support your assertion. Objection denied.

[rightwing2]

Again, I am challenging an author who works for the government in the "national security" industry and can still claim to be a national security expert w/o blushing, who is advising a hawkish stance towards Palestine and Iraq, whilst supporting an inconsequential steel tariff to thwart "dumping."

What so everyone and anyone who works in the national security industry is unqualified to offer foreign policy advise and counsel to the President because they are to blame for 9/11? I must admit, I still do not understand the rationale for your critique of the author here. Also, I did not see anywhere in this article where the author advised "a hawkish stance against Iraq."

[Deb]

Blah blah blah...

I (and many others) have butted and rebutted every one of your "points" and debunked the bogus statement in each as well. It is now your assignment to go find them. Take as long as you like.

The compiling of bogus lists is a long and obviously transparent gimmick here and only to serves to show how dishonest the GOP/Bush-bashers are. If you really cared about the "points" in your hit list, you wouldn't allow for the misstatement of facts in them.

[rwfromkansas]

The few FR critics that ignore the good and look at the bad (and yes, Bush has done some bad things, I will acknowledge) are part of the 5 percent of Republicans that disagree with Bush.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

I can see that you are still as pleasant as ever.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

"So what is that THIS is CONSERVATIVES, not the general population."

Care to re-phrase this statement?

[Howlin]

Shouldn't you be on some other thread, talking about straightening your hair or something?

[Jorge]

Jorge;"Good point. It's to bad that so many of these so-called conservative challenges to Bush's politics have to ruin their objectivity with what are down-right dishonest claims. A 90% approval hardly sounds like an alienated base to me."

From the article: "alienating many of his conservative supporters in the process."

Dishonest claims??

Ok, I'll call them "misleading claims".

Just read the long list of issues the author claims Bush has betrayed conservatives on, supposedly "alienating many of his conservative supporters in the process."......

Add the fact that current polls show Bush with an astronomical 90% approval rating among conservatives...and the entire article, and specifically that statement really reads like BS.

[Jorge]

There are many other misleading claims in the article;

"He has also championed the awarding of permanent most favored nation trade status and WTO membership for Communist China.."

Both the House and Senate voted to give China permanent most favored nation trade status in 1999, long before George Bush was elected. The vote in the Senate was 85-15 in favor.
Furthermore while the author wants to turn this into a betrayal of conservatives, it was in fact a GOP victory.
This vote also paved the way for China's entry into the WTO, and the US-China negotiated agreement on this also occured in 1999. Before Bush was elected.

"Most troublesome of all to Republicans, Bush broke a campaign promise in signing the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill."

Bush never made "a campaign promise" not to sign CFR.
Furthermore the claim that signing CFR is "Most troublesome of all to Republicans" is pretty amazing consider most Republicans supported CFR. They passed the CFR bill Bush signed.

So once again, the author's implications at distorted.

On foreign policy, Bush supported PLO terrorist Yasser Arafat in power and repeatedly urged Sharon to halt Israel's counter-terrorist operations ...

Unlike Clinton who had Arafat to the White House more than any other leader, President Bush has refused to even meet with Yassar Arafat.
And despite the delicate balancing act Bush has had to perform in negotiating the mid-east hostilities, Israel recognizes that of all world leaders Bush is clearly their best friend, and definitely a greater supporter than Clinton ever was.

So once again, the authors claim that Bush conservatives have a real beef over his Israel-PA dealings is misleading.

"In addition, Bush has attempted to push his proposal through Congress to grant amnesty to two million illegal immigrants in the US in a bid to buy the Latino vote in America and appease Mexican President Vincente Fox."

This of course is another falsehood.
Bush never made any proposal "to grant amnesty to two million illegal immigrants" let alone tried to push it through Congress.

Hispanic leader called on Bush to offer such a blanket amnesty but Bush refused.

My point is that there are many false and inaccurate statements in the article...and the general implication that Bush has alienated his conservative base is "misleading".

Its not my fault that you are one of the 90% mind-numbed blind Bush robots.

This is exactly what the Democrats like to say about Bush supporters.
Funny you should want to adopt their terminology.
Is a party switch in your future maybe?

[rightwing2]

Blah blah blah... I (and many others) have butted and rebutted every one of your "points" and debunked the bogus statement in each as well. It is now your assignment to go find them. Take as long as you like. The compiling of bogus lists is a long and obviously transparent gimmick here and only to serves to show how dishonest the GOP/Bush-bashers are. If you really cared about the "points" in your hit list, you wouldn't allow for the misstatement of facts in them.

The facts I present in my list are more or less irrefutable (as your failure and the failure of Republican Wildcat to respond to a single one of them so conclusively indicates) and do not present any mistatements of fact whatsoever. You say you have rebutted every point I have listed somewhere in the FR netherworld and yet you prove your own dishonesty by failing to present a single one of them. You then hypocritically task me to find them since you obviously can't which leads me to believe that you lied about their existance in the first place. All you can say is whine and say "blah, blah" and try to demean me personally without making one single valid point to support your cause. What a joke! It is not my job to rebut my own factual points, but yours. The fact that you can't merely provides strong evidence that the evidence and facts on my side is overwhelming while the evidence on your side is pretty much non-existant.

[Scholastic]

Proof positive that the truth does hurt.

[Scholastic]

Bush has sold out on issues near and dear to the hearts of the Right. It makes no difference if the movement and the rank and file are too blind to see what is going on. Many are still in awe that Clinton is gone. Principle cant be measured by polls--how many leftist brownies you can get without ticking off your conservative sheeples.

[Bob J]

Tonight on at RadioFR! June 6, 2002
9:00 p.m. - 11:00 p.m. EDT / 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. PST...

YO!
ANNA AND MERCURIA
DO THE "REYNOLDS (W)RAP"
(Well, you knew it had to happen sometime...!)

WITH SPECIAL GUEST
DAVID PALMQUIST
"THE KING OF CONSPIRACY"

Click HERE and listen while you FReep!

Check out the live thread!