[softengine]

Sounds sound to me.

[softengine]

Ping.

Thought of our conversation the other day when I saw this.

[MJY1288]

Prepare for the 12 Pack of Perpetual Pouting Pitchforkers to slither in here and solicit the Constitution Party as an alternative

[Austin Willard Wright]

When conservatives unquestioningly endorsed Dubya's war, they joined themselves at the hip with him. They are stuck. Some of us, however, never made that devil's bargain and are free to vote our consciences in November.

[inquest]

we desperately need a national energy policy

Why?

[Redleg Duke]

Excellent analysis...but watch the conservative purists flame!

[chicagolady]

The Lesser of 2 Evils is Evil Still.

[the invisib1e hand]

Maybe Bush is Right On

He is.

[spetznaz]

Sounds sound to me.

Ok .....something about this smacks of a subtle concotion of one-part hypocritism and two-parts feigned ignorance. Let's imagine that it was Clinton who instituted the amnesty program, or the patriot act, or even the (in my opinion rightly deserved) war in Iraq. Were it Clinton people would automatically have circled in for the kill ....an instantaneous reflex action. The amnesty prog (under Klintoon) would have been a tactic to garner more questionable votes, the patriot act would have been one mroe DemoCrap way of increasing govt size and establishing control over everyone, and the war on Iraq would have been some 'wag the dog' crap.

However if it is 'one of our guys' there is some questioning, usually followed by 'it is a smart plan by him that we will all realize after some time.'

Now, i support GW in a myriad of ways. For example the Iraq war in my opinion was a good thing. And who knows .....maybe even the amnesty prog is some terribly cerebral master-stratagem that will bear fruit some time in the future, and that will astonish us all in its intricacy and intelligence. However what bothers me is when people automatically support something just because 'one of ours' said it ......support it (and most of all do not have stupid in-fights) .....but i seriously think it would be prudent to investigate whatever topic it is before jumping on it.

Asbestos underwear on!

[Monti Cello]

This is a great article.

Gov't spending can be controlled, and if the deficit negatively impacts the economy, it will suddenly become a prime political issue as it did in the early 90s.

The class warfare arguments are wearing thin, and tax hikes will not be the automatic answer to deficits, as the libs currently assume.

Entitlement reform will be the movement of the next decade. It is certain. The FDR libs are dying, the new generation is more conservative and not enamored of the 1960s. The Gen Xers will simply refuse to mortgage their lives for a bunch of retirees who got theirs, legislated themselves massive entitlements, and are now demanding more. It ain't gonna happen -- they are going to be cut off.

[JZoback]

The easiest to fix is (a) excessive government spending and (b) illegal immigration – if, and only if, Republicans are in office.

I used to believe that at one time, now it's more like the Republicans take a nickel out of both pockets instead of the democrats taking a dime out of one pocket

[hawk1]

Bush should not have gone left on those issues mentioned in the article. Is the gain worth it for him? He probably will win in a tight race whether he supported these positions or not. Agitating many of your base seems to be very risky.

[swilhelm73]

Well I see that under Bush the Republicans have finally figured out how the heck far leftist Democrats keep getting elected by people who agree with them on little. Namely, the Democrats talk a good game about being a moderate and then govern as far left as possible.

Clinton, was a master at this obviously. He campaigned on reforming government to eliminate waste and cutting taxes. His first few initiatives were increasing wasteful government spending and raising taxes.

The Republican equivalent of this is Bush's "compassionate conservatism". Now the problem here is that the Republicans haven't figured out exactly how to pull off the bait and switch the way the leftists do. Having a pliant press to cover for you helps of course, but it will be a long time still before the Republicans can get even a balanced press, let alone one that favors them.

So the Republicans continue to give up the store on many issues in a depressing fashion. I certainly understand what the goal is, but they need better execution, IMO.

All this being said, there are two issues of singularly prime import in deciding who to vote for in the upcoming presidential election. Who will nominate conservative judges and who will continue to take the war on terror to our enemies when need be?

The answer to that is obviously Bush. Whoever the Democrats field against him will obviously try to appoint hordes of leftist power mongers to the bench. And outside of Lieberman, all of them would gladly trade away American security, and lives, to maintain leftist delusions about the Middle East.

[Henchman]

Sounds like crap to me - defense of a failed President. Anyone would have had to take on ASl-Quaeda. IRAQ, perhaps the info was wrong and the act right - WHY ARE WE THERE NOW? The Democracy will not follow, they are tribal, socialists and love the Ruskies and French - case closed. Bush also has a huge deficit, and allows our jobs to be exported (even Clinton only exported a small percentage.) What jobs Bush doesn't ship he wants to give to Guest Workers who work for substandard wages; they do more than mow lawns; he will make their kids legal, mock those who did thing legally; permite the White House (www.whitehouse.gov) to be in English and Spanish - an insult to those who speak American or learned to speak American; has failed to end abortion, can't get his judges appointed and takes crap by allowing the minority Degenerats to be in control etc etc. I am beginning to believe the Democrats - bush is stupid.

[joesnuffy]

Vote Republican ...we arent as bad as the other guys....

[Holden Magroin]

The author says that not voting for Bush is a vote for one of his opponents. That would bother me if not for the fact that there is nary a difference between Bush and his opponents. While I dread the possibility of a President Edwards or a President Kerry, America literally can't afford another four years of Bush's "compassionate conservatism."

[Peach]

Since we have all been working against the Bush bashers so hard on this site, I thought this article may provide additional ammunition for us.

[spodefly]

[shetlan]

"...(Bush) may be taking his voter base for granted; however, he may just be assuming we’re smart enough to figure out what is going on."

He knows that we are smart enough.

[ckilmer]

Our country faces a number of critical issues we must address in coming years. The easiest to fix is (a) excessive government spending and (b) illegal immigration – if, and only if, Republicans are in office. Excessive government spending can be weaned down over time with a Republican majority in Congress (and it will in due time). Illegal immigration can be solved with technology, a slight bump in spending, and a determined Republican president. Neither, however, can be fixed unless steps are taken to regain a firm control of Congress and overall politics.


Do I agree with amnesty or excessive spending? No; quite the contrary. But I disagree with – and to a great extent, fear – the radical agenda of the left. It will, and has already begun to, destroy this country.
//////////////////////

Man I sure hope this guy is right. But I'm not sure the guy understands the logic of what's happening. There is an enormous tsnunami of people building behind the current tidal wave of people coming into the country. Much of it would be bootstrapped legally by the current wave--even without counting many more now encouraged to come. Most of the current and future ones will be democrats because they will be largly recepients of government largesse--also being voted in.

Overwhelmingly those given amnesty by Republicans in 1986--voted democrat.

History does not suggest that Bush has all his ducks in a row--except, perhaps, for own administration. The demographics-- if not checked--will go against the pubbies.

[prairiebreeze]

Conservatives must be patient. Change takes time and the liberal agenda has taken 50 years to blossom and corrupt to the extent it has. Conservatives must stay in power,and even then, changes to take back and rebuild a solid core to our country will take TIME! And much patience and effort from the adults in this country.

President Bush in most instances sees the big picture. He also is pragmatic enough to realize that he must give as well as take in order to make progress, even when that progress is painfully slow. He holds his nose at times too, to the concessions he has to make along the way in order to ultimately obtain a greater good.

There's way too much at stake to behave and believe like those who seem to be 12 years old who wander the halls of FR bashing the President and threatening to withhold votes etc in order to "teach Bush and the Pubbies a lesson". In fact, they demonstrate they are no more emotionally or mentally mature than those that hang out over at DU. They demonstrate impatience and a juvenile need for immediate gratification. Their grasp of long-term committment is practicaly non-existent.

It's time for adults to be adults and understand the need for patience, grit and stick-to-it-iveness. That's the way we rebuid America. And supporting Bush's re-election is the next important step in a long line of steps to be taken to that end.

Thanks for the ping Peach.

Prairie