Posted on 06/05/2002 1:20:54 PM PDT by 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.
Like maybe use italicized text or quotation marks?
I don't mean to be nit-picky...but when I read your posts sometimes it's hard to tell the quotes you are responding to from your own words.
I often have to backtrack to the posts from the person you are responding to be sure which parts of your post is their quote.
It would just make it easier if you used italicized text or quotation marks. OK?
I have NO idea. They SAY they are. I have a feeling a lot of them are still getting over the big fight that they had during "their" convention at the Reform Party shindig!
And also the ideologues embrace moral-liberalism, not unlike the Democratic, Greens, and Trotskyite ideologues, and that makes them far from conservatives.
Thanks Kreskin.
Friday's Dow Index could go up or down. Hey, this is fun!
"When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn't like it. "Compromise" was a dirty word to them and they wouldn't face the fact that we couldn't get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don't get it all, some said, don't take anything. I'd learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: 'I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.'"If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for", I say, "you take it and fight for the rest later", and that's what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.
Ronald Reagan, from his autobiography, An American Life.
It'll get worse closer to the election, just like it did when Bush jr. was annointed.
You must be reading the wrong post, friend. The text is right there. Bush says he'll veto unconstitutional legislation. Very weak debate.
Apologies.
Well, perhaps next time you'll pay closer attention.
You apparently glossed over where I prefaced "trivial" with "For the Most Part". I do consider Bush's axing of the Kyoto Treaty to be a VERY significant and positive action. BTW, do you have any response to points I made showing how many times Mr. Bush has strayed off the conservative ranch?
George Will: do you think a president - and we've got a lot of non-lawyer presidents - has a duty to make an independent judgment of what is and is not constitutional, and veto bills that, in his judgment, he thinks are unconstitutional?Governor Bush: I do.
Seems pretty clear to me.
Some Bush supporters fired back because what went on was so unbelieveable. I personally believe it is being done on purpose to split different groups out. I even posted an article warning that was going to happen and it looks like some of that is happening on here!
When is the last time you saw people on here quoting the NY Times, WP, or LA Times for their sources or Salon? Does make you wonder -- at least it makes me wonder!
There was only ONE 1st amendment question regarding CFR. That was the issue ad ban. That was a poison pill placed there as veto bait by the Senate democrats. They were convinced Bush would veto the bill because it was obviously un-constitutional. They then had a 2002 campaign issue that Bush and the GOP were anti reform and at the same time they kept their original cash cow in soft money in tact.
Do you think for one moment that the Democrats would vote for a Campaign bill that actually works against them if they thought the president would actually sign it? Hell NO!. They got cute and placed an undeniable 1st amendment violation in the bill, Bush signed it, that portion will be struck down and the democrats have NO issue to go with their own agreement to cut off the soft money they rely on.
"annointed'???
Are you one of those who believe Bush is not a legitimately elected president?
"Like maybe use italicized text or quotation marks?"
APOLOGIES
Try #526.
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.