Posted on 03/08/2006 7:08:13 AM PST by beeler
If the ancient political wisdom is correct that a charge unanswered is a charge agreed to, the Bush White House pleaded guilty yesterday at the Cato Institute to some extraordinary allegations.
"We did ask a few members of the Bush economic team to come," explained David Boaz, the think tank's executive vice president, as he moderated a discussion between two prominent conservatives about President Bush. "We didn't get that."
Now why would the administration pass up such an invitation?
Well, it could have been because of the first speaker, former Reagan aide Bruce Bartlett. Author of the new book "Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy," Bartlett called the administration "unconscionable," "irresponsible," "vindictive" and "inept."
It might also have had something to do with speaker No. 2, conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan. Author of the forthcoming "The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It; How to Get It Back," Sullivan called Bush "reckless" and "a socialist," and accused him of betraying "almost every principle conservatism has ever stood for."
Nor was moderator Boaz a voice of moderation. He blamed Bush for "a 48 percent increase in spending in just six years," a "federalization of public schools" and "the biggest entitlement since LBJ."
True, the small-government libertarians represented by Cato have always been the odd men out of the Bush coalition. But the standing-room-only forum yesterday, where just a single questioner offered even a tepid defense of the president, underscored some deep disillusionment among conservatives over Bush's big-spending answer to Medicare and Hurricane Katrina, his vast claims of executive power, and his handling of postwar Iraq.
Bartlett, who lost his job at the free-market National Center for Policy Analysis because of his book, said that if conservatives were honest, more would join his complaint.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Folks,
There are Democrat activists here. Anyone advocating GOP defeat in Congress so that liberal Democrats take seats is advocating advancement of the liberal Democratic party.
They are very very few and when they enshroud their posts with conservative buzzphrases like border control and lower spending they think this immunizes them from zotting.
Just keep in mind Tom DeLay won last night. The GOP will hold that seat via the power of incumbency, and make no mistake, that seat was critical to Democrat hopes of taking the House.
These few insignificant insects posting here who are DU activists or 3rd party activists (generally these two categories can be envisioned as one) are having no effect and influence policy not at all. Threads devoted to their cause are best avoided. Let them bump their own. Prefer to spend time on threads devoted to the lowering US casualties in Iraq.
The Patriot Act and No Border Security are the two issues that gripe me the most....who's at fault?
Our Constitution is threatened and our economy takes on 500,000 illegals a year.
Plus eventually some terrorists will cross the mexican/canadian border if they haven't already.
Who do we hold accountable for these horrendous issues?
ping
You can pick at the edges and try to redefine the borders but traditional core conservative ideals such as, limited government are what most real conservatives need to be concerned about. The traditional core beliefs are being discarded in the name of political gamesmanship.
Did you know that Ronald Reagan called libertarianism the "heart and soul of conservatism"?
No one who believes in traditional conservative ideals has to accept the GOP being infested with big government socialist political oportunists. That's rediculous.
George W. Bush's "compassionate conservatism" has offered NOTHING to real conservatives either. Sadly, Bartlett is right.
Those now running government, their apologists and enablers.
We have the best we can have for the conservative agenda, may be we can squeeze lit bit more and that is all about it. The theoretical absolute conservatism advocated by some on FR and elsewhere means total defeat at the polls.
Oh I see just because someone doesn't agree with you....you call them a democrat....
Get a life!!!
LOL!
No one should believe that destroying GWB will help get more conservative people elected. We must build on the steps GWB has taken, and continue to get the most conservative people we can elected.
Big government, socialist, political opportunists describes our true enemy...the Democrats. John Kerry would be an excellent example...the man GWB beat by only three percentage points.
I thank God everyday that GWB was elected instead of Al Gore or John Kerry.
How many video or audio clips are there of Republican elected officials pounding the podium for LIMITED GOVERNMENT? A clip or sound bite of that is as rare as a Bush veto.
Sullivan called Bush "reckless" and "a socialist," and accused him of betraying "almost every principle conservatism has ever stood for."
Sullivan sums it up nicely, and try as they may, the cheerleaders and RNC loyalists can't defend the indefensible.
Far better for all conservatives to show outrage at the leftist Republicans. We gain far more ground in holding Republicans accountable than we do by bashing RATs. The Harriet Miers embarrassment and eventual Sam Alito confirmation proved that point.
My tagline rings true yet again.
About the threat posed by Hezbollah?
About the fear most Christians have in this country about their supposedly "peaceful" Muslim neighbors, and drawing parallels between the genocide against Copts in Egypt and Christians in Sudan, and the plans they have for us here?
God help us!! Open your eyes, please!
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.