Posted on 04/10/2006 8:45:19 PM PDT by rodeocowboy
Is Bush's Second Term Becoming a 'Harriet Miers Presidency'? by Jerome R. Corsi Posted Apr 07, 2006
Watching the immigration bill charade unfold in the Senate, many conservatives have begun to wonder if President Bush left his political compass back at Crawford?
Conservatives were very happy with Bush right through his second inaugural. But the Harriet Miers nomination was a shocker. There was so much conservative backlash that Miers had to withdraw her nomination. But, we were only some three months into the second term, and anybody can have a “Harriet Miers Moment,” trying too hard to thank a friend.
Then there was the State of the Union speech. There President Bush went “green” on energy, mouthing a line better than the political left or the radical environmentalists could make up, saying that America is “addicted to oil.” Wasn’t Bush an oil company executive once?
Someone should remind Karl Rove that conservatives like to drill for oil. What ever happened to the proposal drill in ANWR? Again, conservatives couldn’t believe what they were hearing. Was the Bush Administration’s solution to America’s dependency on foreign oil really going to be wood chips and switch grass? Bio-fuels were always a Democratic argument. What happened?
Then, the Dubai ports deal accomplished something most conservatives thought impossible. Defending Dubai, the President actually lost his ground on his major strength, the War on Terrorism. Bush actually allowed the Democrats to posture as hawks on the national security issue. Conservatives were beginning to get numb with shock.
Now, Bush is praising Senate Republicans for working with Teddy Kennedy and Harry Reid on the immigration bill. G. Gordon Liddy is right when he says the Senate “just sold America out to Mexico.” Bush and Sen. John McCain will probably never understand that for most true conservatives a “guest worker” program is just amnesty in disguise. Conservatives care about securing the border. For conservatives, “guest workers” are still illegal aliens. For conservatives, the illegal immigration threat is about national security, not NAFTA.
A strong conservative base voted for Bush’s re-election in November 2004. The President has made a series of decisions that suggest he wants to move more to the center, something the conservative base does not view with favor. Or maybe, as many have speculated, Bush is truly a CINO (Conservative in Name Only).
Still, there is one more explanation. Maybe Bush has decided to work secretly for the election of Hillary Clinton as President in 2008. Since the 2004 election, Bush has gone out of his way several times to talk warmly about President Bill Clinton’s budding friendship with his father, Bush 41. Surely the President realizes that most conservatives still cringe at the mention of Bill Clinton’s name.
But maybe the plan is to establish a Bush-Clinton dynasty? First Bush 41, followed by William Jefferson Clinton, followed by Bush 43, followed by Hillary Rodham Clinton -- that’s how the dynasty idea would go. From there, probably we are supposed to return to Jeb Bush, to be followed by Chelsea.
If that’s the plan, forget it. For most conservatives, even the mention of Hillary’s name is like the sound of scraping your fingernails on a blackboard. Conservatives might someday buy Jeb, but Chelsea? Probably never.
A “Harriet Miers Presidency” in which George W. Bush abandons his conservative base is a very bad idea.
If Karl Rove thinks the Republican Party will gain by pandering to all those illegal immigrants, maybe he should first worry about how many conservatives he is going to alienate in the process.
Right now, the 2006 midterm congressional elections are shaping up to be a major Republican Party setback. Maybe that will kill any thought that a “Harriet Miers Presidency” move-to-the-center is a good idea. It isn’t. Passing this immigration bill is probably a 2006 death wish for at least three or four Republican senators we can identify without thinking too hard.
Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along with John O'Neill), "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), and "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians." He is a frequent guest on the G. Gordon Liddy radio show. He will soon co-author a new book with Jim Gilchrist on the Minuteman Project.
And I see other parallels. These demonstrations are too organized and the Democrats are standing ready to receive and address the protestors and encourage them. Moreover, the press is covering the entire story just right for the political gain of the Democrats - divide and conquer. Division between class and ethnicity always works to the Democrats' benefit.
I also remember the Clinton impeachment. It was about obstruction of justice and perjury - but the press and the Democrats misdirected the issue to "sex sex sex". The emotions ran so high at that time that even here on the forum most people bought the "sex sex sex" mantra hook, line and sinker. That was "subject number one" and Clinton skated with an acquittal in the Senate.
They manipulated us then, they are manipulating us now. If we let it happen, we can only blame ourselves.
How long did it take you to come up with that one?
"Indeed it does. But I remember Vietnam and how unbridled and irrational free speech and dissent deflated the morale of the servicemen. I wonder if the average soldier in Iraq is thinking the voters at home have forgotten him.
And I see other parallels. These demonstrations are too organized and the Democrats are standing ready to receive and address the protestors and encourage them. Moreover, the press is covering the entire story just right for the political gain of the Democrats - divide and conquer. Division between class and ethnicity always works to the Democrats' benefit.
I also remember the Clinton impeachment. It was about obstruction of justice and perjury - but the press and the Democrats misdirected the issue to "sex sex sex". The emotions ran so high at that time that even here on the forum most people bought the "sex sex sex" mantra hook, line and sinker. That was "subject number one" and Clinton skated with an acquittal in the Senate.
They manipulated us then, they are manipulating us now. If we let it happen, we can only blame ourselves."
All perfect examples of why having one entity in this case the MSM control all information. Freedom of speech is worth 20 vietnams, its worth every person in our country. I'd rather America be destroyed than live under oppression. You don't get this conservatism thing do ya.
Regardless, it is insanity to keep pumping up muslim numbers in our homeland. What is our goal with such a practice? To follow the likes of France and Holland over the cliff?
Well said BUMP.
Replying to his posts is giving him license to waste more bandwidth, however.
"Those Harriet Miers storm troopers who called people sexist, were the same ones who threw around the "racist" epithet during the Dubai Port issue, and are now using it again, over and over. They're very tiresome and predictable at this point."
Amen to that. If they can't convince you, they'll simply outshout and insult you. Sort of like their pals in the streets have been doing in the last coupla weeks.
"When you think of it, it's more likely they're on the DNC payroll. They drive people away from the Republican party by their obnoxious behavior."
That's my personal theory. I've voiced it a couple of times to that kind of poster, and the ones I said it to shut up fast and moved on...of course, maybe that 'moved on' part is just coincidence. 8)
Some coalition, 43% & 49%, respectively, in '92 & '96. Try Perot for an explanation of how Willie won.
If you notice, it works. He hasn't bugged me yet.
If it does it is because pseudo Conservative like a handful of "Freepers" spend 100% of their time acting as "Virtual Campaigners" for the DNC. This is a thread is an excellent example.
The Saddam docs are all over Freeper. Do any of the Whine All the Time choir even look at those threads? NO instead they post the 10,000th hissy fit whine at Bush to help in an unwitting, or knowing, attempt to spread DNC propaganda.
So either they are political fools, or they are KNOWINGLY acting on behalf of the Democrat Party's 2006 campaign. So which is it? Fools or Traitors?
That doesn't quite cut it though. The War on Terror may still be going on after we've all passed away. The president can't be above criticism for the next hundred years simply because we're "in a time of war."
Wow...the handle "MNJohnnie" sounds suspiciouosly like "Baghdad Bob"...
Sorry, but this conservative likes TRUTH, even if the DNC happens to make it a talking point occasionally. The truth is, President Bush is conservative in only a few limited ways.
Anytime I feel like disagreeing with MNJ, I remind myself that MNJ could be FFLBB incognito. :)
Almost forgot, Corsi "jokingly" claims Bush is working for Hillary because he doesn't criticize Bill Clinton. This is the dumbest thing I've heard. There is a standing tradition that former and current Presidents don't knock each other. President Bush is just standing for the tradition while Carter and Clinton are acting like idiots spitting on the tradition. For Corsi to think Bush should stoop to that level just proves his ignorance.
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.