A Few Questions For Die-Hard Bush Supporters

Toogood Reports ^ | June 5, 2002 | Lee R. Shelton IV

[Stand Watch Listen]

Let me just say up front that I am not addressing you if you voted for George W. Bush in 2000 and regret it. The same goes for those of you who voted for Bush and insist on holding his feet to the fire on the important issues. If, however, you cast your vote for Bush, still believe he is the only hope for America and intend to support every move he makes without so much as a raised eyebrow, this is for you.

It has been nearly a year-and-a-half since George W. Bush, the savior of conservatism, descended from on high to begin his earthly reign in Washington, D.C. Republicans assured us that he would restore integrity to the White House and would be a marked improvement over the promiscuous Bill Clinton. Well, in all honesty, that could have been accomplished by electing a neutered chimp to the office of president.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush the man proved to be a nice break from Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Unlike Gore, Bush had a more likable...well, he actually had a personality. He also possessed the unique ability to address the American people without the smug and condescending vibe Clinton exuded. However, when it came to policy, George W. Bush the candidate failed to demonstrate that he would govern any differently than his Democrat counterparts.

Still, throughout the campaign, there was a loyal group of Bush supporters who would take offense at even the slightest implication that their candidate was anything but a staunch conservative. Even now, they continue to stand by their man, and I find this to be rather perplexing.

Perhaps those who have pledged their undying allegiance to President Bush could answer a few questions for me, in no particular order of course:

•  How would you have reacted if Bill Clinton had signed the Patriot Act into law and given the government sweeping new surveillance powers?

•  Would you have criticized a Democrat president for signing a $26 billion education-spending bill?

•  Did you feel betrayed when Bush signed Campaign Finance Reform into law?

•  What do you think about Bush's position on granting amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants?

•  Would you have tolerated a Democrat proposal for federally funded faith-based initiatives?

•  What would your reaction have been if a Democrat had said, "No one should have to pay more than a third of their income to the federal government"?

•  What do you think about the president's granting of Permanent Most Favored Nation status to China?

•  What's the difference between Bush and the Democrats on the issue of farm subsidies?

•  How would you react if a Democrat president sent a $2.13 trillion budget to Congress?

•  Would you have stood for a Democrat saying "No!" to arming airline pilots?

•  What would your reaction have been if a Democrat had pushed for the federalization of airport security?

•  Are you willing to stand by and let the Bush administration cater to the environmentalists on the global warming issue?

•  What do you think about Bush's call for a Patient's Bill of Rights?

•  What one thing has Bush done that sets him apart from the Democrats?

•  It's been a year-and-a-half since Bush took office. When do we start to see a decrease in the size and scope of government? For that matter, when do we start to see even a remote indication that this administration will think about doing anything to try to limit the federal government?

This list is by no means exhaustive, but I would really be interested in some answers. Perhaps it would help shed some light on the mindset of modern compassionate conservatives.

The fact that a Republican president is governing like a Democrat isn't surprising. What's amazing to me is that there are a few select Bush supporters out there who cannot—or will not—utter one word of criticism against their president for any reason. In their minds this man is the epitome of conservatism, and to question his actions would be to question their own beliefs and cause them to wonder why they supported him in the first place.

The way I see it there can only be two explanations for this: 1) these people really and truly believe in what Bush is doing, or 2) they do not wish to face up to the real reason they voted for him — he was simply a slightly more palatable choice than Al Gore.

[GingisK]

...working with a senate that stops him everytime he turns around...

Do you have some evidence that Bush ever so much as mentioned any of the items I listed? No. That must mean he is content with those things they way they are now structured.

[Howlin]

At least you're honest about it. :-)

[oldvike]

He has exposed a heck of a lot of CINO moderates on FR, however.

Ain't that the truth. BTW, your entire post was splendid. Well done.

[monday]

"Congrats, that's precisely what Democrats want you to believe, especially if they can get you to vote for someone besides a Republican."

LOL...I keep hearing this, its all a Democrat plot nonsense. Do you actually believe this? We may not agree with you politically, but we aren't dumb. We can see just as easily as you what congress does and what the president doe's.

Lately congress has been passing hidiously bloated spending bills loaded with bi-partisan pork and Bush has been signing them. I am not very happy with either.

[Southack]

"In the mean time, as stated in the article, Bush has increase spending in unConstitutional areas to astronimical heights, established new surveillance programs that put Americans under greater governmental scrutiny than ever before, and has signed the CFR bill. He certainly ISN'T a Conservative..."

Nonsense. Congress increased spending. Sure, Bush could veto every budget bill and shut down our government. During wartime.

And he could devote all of his energies to fighting 51 Democrats in the Senate. Instead of fighting terrorists.

But sooner or later he'd have to sign a budget bill no matter how much he fought Congress.

What you want is for Bush to spend all of his time fighting Democrats in Congress (rather than fighting terrorists) so that you won't have to get off your butt to help make Congress see the light of lower spending.

Ergo, it is you who isn't Conservative.

Bush killed federal monies for foreign "family planning" activities. That's Conservative, and that's far more than you will ever accomplish in your life.

Bush withdrew the U.S. from the U.S. - CCCP ABM treaty. That's Conservative, and it is certainly more Conservative than your grand idea to fight Congress over the budget instead of paying attention to our national defense.

Bush got Congress, including a Democratic Senate, to fund our national missile defense system over their own objections to it. That's not only Conservative, that's some major political manuevering.

Bush got one tax cut for increased depreciation for businesses as well as another tax cut for lower income taxes for individuals passed. That's Conservative, and that's far more than Clinton/Gore/Buchanon/Phillips/Nader/Brown ever delivered.

Is current Congressional spending unConstitutional, as you claim above? No.

Are Americans and foreign visitors under greater scrutiny now under Bush than before, as you claim above? Yes. In case you haven't heard, we're in the middle of a War on Terror. Gee, you emails might be read by a software program in Quantico now. Oh, how I feel sorry for you.

Not.

[deport]

Now, suddenly I can't critique the President? I am one of PHI Mom's "17% Conservatives who voted for Gore" ROFL!

Laugh about it all you want... I asked you up the thread for info or documentation of exit polling showing demographic data. You haven't responded but have trashed that number. It's in at least two exit polls I've seen. Again do you have something different.

We may can say they didn't know what conservative was, but that is how they answered the question.....

[Howlin]

And what's your point? He did NOT campagin against CFR; I posted the link to HIS suggestion for reform.

[RaceBannon]

Well, Mom, I am sick and tired of the mantra, "Well, You didnt want Gore, did you?"

That is a cop out!!

We want a conservative, and when we are assured by the likes of all the Bush supporters on this forum that he was, and those like myself said the emperor has no clothes, and low and behold, he proves me right, references to ALgore are meaningless!!

Voting for the lesser of two evils means you are still voting for evil!

My disappointment was increased when almost 2 years before the election, the media annointed him as the lead candidate. Then, during the campaign, the likes of Limbaugh and Hannity told us to stop thinking of the crimes of the Clinton Administration, (EVEN THOUGH THOSE CRIMES AND THEIR EXPOSURE IS WHY WE LISTENED TO LIMBAUGH AND HANNITY) and they both assured us Bush would not forget, and he would seek to prosecute....I am still waiting.

And with the blame game about 9/11, can you tell me a better time to expose the lapses of the Clinton administration? The previous bombings? Killing for Monica and how that probably made Osama madder than he already was?

Holding hands in a church with the religious leaders who tell their own followers America deserves it?? These same Muslims that Bush held hands with almost attacked us in DC back in April! Remember the reports of that Freep?

What steps have been taken to secure our borders? Our ports? Where is the manpower necessary to do this with any reality in approach?

[MJY1288]

Now that I see you are not as brain dead as the rest of your friends over at DU, and you do know how to post a link, GO and post a link to the transcript of the Ashcroft confirmation hearing so we can ALL see the LIES you posted here tonight.

Take the advice of the "NIKE" Corperation and "Just Do It"

[Jhoffa_]

Just because Bush isn't doing what YOU think he should be doing, you're mad. Well, fine. But please stop acting like it's ONLY you.

No, I just don't see how voting for your guy one day means we are all on the same side and everything is wonderful and saying somethign bad the next means someone has to pack it up and leave the forum. Or how it makes them a democrat, or a "disrupter" or anything else but a voter questioning the person he voted for.

You see. You can't have it both ways.

George Bush was the candidate for the GOP last time; you could have stayed home. Probably you should have.

No, I voted for him.. I was happy to do so, had the yard sign and the whole bit. But when I see him do something that I don't agree with I am going to say openly that I think he's wrong.

Some people simply can't handle that I guess. Since this is a political forum and everything I thought criticizm would be a little more welcome from bona-fied bush voters. It seems contradictory, that's all.

[Texasforever]

They are also quoting from a 2000 article which by the time CFR had been passed had been re-written twice. Bush's proposal is very close to the actual bill signed.

[Alberta's Child]

See Post #76.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Can you fr mail me a reply to 352, please?

[ruoflaw]

ref: your 387....these complainers that are bashing President Bush are not his supporters and I really doubt that they ever were....they can't even stand together in a time of war!

[Howlin]

Well, evidently you can. You and I both voted for him, or so you say; now you're saying YOU have the right to bash him, but you're upset if I defend him?

Can you point me to any posts where you've SUPPORTED Bush? All I've seen you do is complain.