Posted on 10/09/2004 10:21:02 PM PDT by CJHughes
BY BOB BARR
Voting for president used to be so easy, at least for a conservative. There was the Republican candidate. You knew he generally stood for lower taxes, less government spending, giving fewer powers to the government, lower deficits and a zealous regard for individual privacy.
Then, there was the Democrat. You knew he generally stood for higher taxes, more government and deficit spending, and a zealous regard for civil liberties.
Throughout my own presidential voting history, the choices have rarely, if ever, been agonizing. Nixon vs. McGovern? Carter vs. Reagan? Reagan-Mondale? Dukakis, a Massachusetts liberal? Clinton? Al Gore? Ah, the good ol' days. Each of those races presented clear choices, easily resolved.
Now we have the election of 2004. For the first time in my voting life, the choice in the race for president isn't so clear And, among true conservatives, I'm not alone.
What's making the contest so difficult? It's certainly not that both candidates are so conservative that we have a choice of riches. It's not even that John Kerry is sort of right wing compared to George W. Bush. The incumbent clearly is the more "conservative" of the two.
But the concerns for many conservative voters -- concerns that may cause them not to vote for Mr. Bush on Nov. 2 -- fall generally into three categories: fiscal, physical (as in the physical security of our nation) and freedom (as in protecting our civil liberties).
When Bush became president Jan. 20, 2001, he inherited an enviable fiscal situation. Congress, then controlled by his own party, had -- through discipline and tough votes -- whittled down decades of deficit spending under presidents of both parties, so that annual deficits of hundreds of billions of dollars had been transformed to a series of real and projected surpluses. The heavy lifting had been done. All Bush had to do was resist the urge to spend, and he had to exert some pressure on Congress to resist its natural impulses to do the same. Had he done that, he might have gone down in history as the most fiscally conservative president in modern times.
Instead, what we got were record levels of new spending, including nearly double-digit increases in nondefense discretionary spending. We now have deficits exceeding those that the first Republican-controlled Congress in 40 years faced when it convened in January 1995.
The oft-repeated mantra that "the terrorists made us spend more" rings hollow, especially to those who actually understand that increases in nondefense discretionary spending are not the inevitable result of fighting terrorists. It also irritates many conservatives, whether or not they support the war in Iraq, that so much of defense spending is being poured into the black hole of Iraq's internal security, while the security of our own borders goes wanting.
That brings us to the second major beef conservatives have with the president. He's seen as failing to take real steps to improve our border security. In many respects, because of his apparent desire to appease his compadre to the south -- Mexican President Vincente Fox -- Bush has made matters worse. More people are entering our country illegally than ever before, more than 3 million this year alone -- and most of them are stampeding across from Mexico.
It seems as if every time an effort is made to implement measures that would crack down on illegal immigration, Fox complains, and the White House tells our enforcement folks to back off. Perhaps that is why intelligence reports indicate al-Qaeda is actively recruiting in Central America.
At the same time, here at home, many law-abiding citizens accurately perceive that their own freedoms and civil liberties are being stripped. They are being profiled by government computers whenever they want to travel, their bank accounts are being summarily closed because they may fit some "profile," they are under surveillance by cameras paid for by that borrowed federal money, and, if the administration has its way, they will be forced to carry a national identification card. That skewed sense of priorities really rankles conservatives.
Those are but three tips of the iceberg that signal the deep dissatisfaction many conservatives harbor against the president. Thus far, however, with Bush's political gurus telling him he's ahead and to just lay low and not make any major gaffes, he seems unwilling to recognize the problems on his right flank. Or he seems to have concluded that he doesn't need to address those concerns because the ineptitude of the Kerry campaign hasn't forced him to.
But the race appears to be tightening again. It's likely to remain tight until Election Day. Those dissatisfied conservative voters will become increasingly important, but it's going to be impossible for the president to pull them back in with hollow, last-minute promises.
Bush's problem is that true conservatives remember their history. They recall that in recent years when the nation enjoyed the fruits of actual conservative fiscal and security policies, a Democrat occupied the White House and Congress was controlled by a Republican majority that actually fought for a substantive conservative agenda.
History's a troublesome thing for presidents. Even though most voters don't take much of a historical perspective into the voting booth with them, true conservatives do.
Hmmm. Who's the Libertarian candidate again?
Lifelong Republican Bob Barr represented parts of Cobb County and northwest Georgia in Congress from 1995 to 2003.
I believe Bob Barr is still bitter toward Bush and the RNC for not favoring him over John Linder in the hotly contested 2002 GA-07. Barr was very dishonest when he moved into John Linder's House district and claimed the district for himself. However, the voters of the Atlanta suburban-based district told him to get lost. The 2002 GOP primary results showed what real cosnervatives think fo Bob Barr.
Hmm. So far, the terrorists have blown up my neighborhood -- *twice* -- and nearly killed me the second time, not to mention coming close to destroying my home. The gubmint -- big or otherwise -- has yet to do that to me.
The terrorists murdered friends and neighbors of mine, while the gubmint hasn't done so.
Ahhhh, that must be it.
Here we go again with the "real conservatives," i.e., the religious right, threatening to sit hom.
Here's a clue for them: Karl Rove doesn't count them as "likely voters" since 2000.
The Media has created many Monsters (Mc Cain comes to mind)and celebrities.
The economy he inherited was.....well as Rush put it when it seemed to be hitting on all cylinders.......was a result of the republicans taking over congress. It's only when the wheels fell off that it again became Clinton's faltering economy.
"Being blown up bugs me..."
Yup. National security trumps everything else. We don't know what our enemies have in store for us. What we DO know is that President Bush has done alot to improve our national security and he will kick butt if they hit us again. Kerry has shown that he will not fight for ANYTHING. He will be too worried about what the rest of the world would think of him.
Barr went to work for the ACLU.
He is hardly in a respectable position to represent anybody Conservative.
If he thinks he has clout with his Congressional carrer, he should know that most remember he moved from his district to cannabalize another Republican because he thought it was an easier district to win.
He's still pouting.
He's employed by the American Criminal Liberties Union. 'Nuff said...
So is Dick Armey and he hasn't gone crazy.
Bob Barr led me to FR many moons ago. That being said; he needs a makeover desperately. He looks like an alien and creeps me out.
btw, do we have a number 6 tonight?
Barr is just as stupid as Don Imus and thats going some.
Thumbs up!
Good comment. Very good. And 100% on target!
You are not necessarily right. Several of my friends and I are very much "real conservatives" who are also very opposed to the war in Iraq. Of the five of us,three are Cathlics. Three will definitely vote for Bush,one is undecided and one will probably vote for the Conservative party candidate.
None of us would consider voting for Kerry, he presents with all of the charm and appeal of a trained zombie and he lies without missing a beat. Kerry also is deeply entrenched in the Culture of Death,Bush is not. There are many others out there who believe as we do and will vote to reflect that belief.
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.