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.
If Zell Miller changed party tomorrow, the whole world would change. Daschele is burying conservative judges, popular programs and Executive managers. Why? They don't have the reason, or courage, to vote AGAINST these people on the Senate Floor. They are all qualified. So he's taken the air out of the ball. There's nothing that can be done if 50 Democrats and one Cockroach from Vermont aren't willing to do their duty of advise and consent.
JimRob's right. Winning the Senate is a HUGE leverage tool in getting conservative priorities passed. No Senator is going to fillibuster a Federal Judge who is qualified, but conservative. The last judge (Mississippi?) would have been confirmed if his nomination ever got to the Senate floor. Leahy choked it in Committee. Bush had 4 months in office before Jeffords was bought off. That's it. He got Ashcroft through, a Tax break through, Missile Defense through ... etc. etc. All those things would have been impossible in Daschele's Senate. Zell Miller is the swing vote that Daschele needed to neutralize, seeing as Strom just wouldn't die as expected. Jeffords ... plan B.
That's very true.
But real conservatives are very patient folks. In fact, that's what conservatism is all about. We prefer gradual development to abrupt change. Conservative incrementalism, works well in politics, because political change is a slow process. Things don't happen overnight. Seven decades of Democrats building on creeping policies of liberal socialism, has proven that. If you want abrupt change, thats called a revolution.
And I voted for President Bush, and contributed to his campaign, and volunteered for him, and worked at a campaign event for then-candidate Cheney. And helped organize protests against Algore's attempted theft of the presidency.
I basically got associated with the Buchananites, who I personally disagree with on most issues. I think there are too many people who are too quick on the trigger.
News flash, God will not review your voting record. God did not invent politics. God did not cover Adam with a voting ballot, but a fig leaf.
I posted an article that said the DemocRAT strategy was to attack, attack on all fronts and it looks like some of what we have been seeing is just that. There has been an overeaction a lot but this past few days got totally out of hand.
I have had to post numerous times that I am not talking about dissent is not welcome but it never has gotten through to some folks. Dissent is healthy IMHO but you can do it without bashing and people need to use facts. Not that hard to check out sources on the Internet.
Thanks for your comments! And I agree with them!
Eagles up my friend :-)
Mike
P.S. a Freeper once told me.... "Winning a flame war on the internet is like winning a Gold Medal at the special olympics... Sure!... it's cool.... But you're still a retard"
I'm still laughing at that one
Funny you should say that.....
A while back there was a statement release by the Catholic Church detailing how catholics should vote. Basically, it stated that we should vote for whichever candidate would push to have abortion made illegal no matter what his other politics are.
There was a thread about that here on FR about a year ago, but I have no clue how to find a thread that old.
The foundational intent of the US Constitution is that of limited government, wherein the power of the government is limited by its separation into three branches and is shackled by the rights inherent in the people themselves. More importantly, these individual rights precede and supercede the government itself; they are granted by the Creator. Hence the most immediate point of the Constitution is that the government is granted its powers solely by the people, in whom all power of government lies.
To me, that is Consitutional principle to which all politicians should subscribe. Now, looking at the Constitutional foundation ideals - how many Republicans truly believe and practice it?
No MEN as opposed to BOYS use their heads instead of their big mouths to get things done. MEN as opposed to BOYS don't try to win the shouting match they just win the fight. MEN as opposed to BOYS know that when you are only 1/3 of the constitutional government you must let each third exercise its constitutionally granted powers when there is a conflict.
That's why I didn't go with my first choice for FR screename: "HmongNBAstar"
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.