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.
Agreed. That's why if it's a choice between a liberal Democrat or a liberal RINO, I'll deal with that reality and vote 3rd party.
I would hope that if somebody was being paid to propagandize, that they would at least be capable of putting together a semi-coherent argument. The insulting bullies around here just have a few screws loose I think. If there is anyone paying money for any sort of propagandizing, send me a Freepmail. Daddy needs a new pair of shoes!
You are old enough to know better. NOTHING in life is perfect. Reagan passed a Full Amnesty and two of the largest tax HIKES in US History. He had no choice.
Crying because the glass is 40% empty is politically dumb. But maybe the Old line Conservatives simply are a spent force. Maybe you spent SO much time in the minority you simply do NOT know how to lead anymore. Maybe this is all the Conservatives are capable of now days, carp, whine, go into hysterics.
I think I finally realized what was going on, when Andy Card was quoted back during the 2004 election. He supposedly said, "Who cares what the conservatives want, they have nowhere else to go."
When I heard that, a big red light went on for me. Such a cynical comment cannot be condoned.
No longer will I blindly support those who thumb their noses at us. It's enough.
Don't whine to us when you find that two thirds of the conservative base lets you see how much of a party you have without us this November.
I swear some of them should be on the RNC payroll. Well, maybe they are.
Second terms are difficult. Reagan had some big challenges, like Iran-Contra. Bush is not perfect, but he is better than the guys who ran against him in '00 and '04. I can't imagine what our security situation would look like with Gore or Kerry. The borders issue obviously took a back seat to 9/11 and Islamofascism, but I'm confident that a reasonably good bill will eventually emerge from the House-Senate conference committee, and that the President will sign something less than all enforcement and something more than "Bienvenidos amigos!"
I'm sorry. Since you switched to a third party, you are politically irrelevant. Your a wasted vote. No need to waste any of my time responding to your posts.
Fight your own battles and stop pounding the abuse button.
Thanks.
It would not surprise me at all, except the quality of the posts can be pretty pathetic at times...
One would think the RNC could have done better than that.
In the past such obvious trolling was dealt with summarily. When did the rules change that vicious, broad-based attacks on FReepers as a class were fair game?
Some posts look desperate....it's funny how the spin isn't working like it used to..."pay no mind to the man behind the curtain" ;)
"I swear some of them should be on the RNC payroll. Well, maybe they are."
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 the truth!
My policy is to NEVER hit the abuse button, except for circumstances that have nothing to do with opinions with which I disagree. It has worked like a charm for 7 years. Hone you debating skills. Toughen up. Be a man. Cheers.
Hmmm...interesting idea. Maybe you've hit on it.
Makes sense actually, some of the posts seem to have the obvious lack of grammar and spelling that you would find on DU.
If it were a debate, I'd happily debate. But there's nothing about it to debate, simply the same ad hominem attacks on FReepers and conservatives as a whole that have been cut and pasted into post after post, thread after thread, and that fits the customary definition of "abuse".
Wow. Your line of party-over-principle reasoning is so stunningly foolish it's hard to know what to say to it. You say that a vote for a candidate that loses is a wasted vote. I say that a vote for a candidate that does not best represent your values is a wasted vote. In fact, it's worse than a wasted vote-----it's a moronic vote made by somebody who has lost sight of why we vote in the first place. As for being politically irrelevant...I will concede that you are more politically relevant than me if you can provide me a single example of an election that was determined based on your vote. For instance, if you had voted for John Kerry in 2004 would Kerry have won? I'm trying to determine your degree of relevance. Perhaps Bush couldn't have done it without you. Or perhaps you are getting a little swept up by your own arrogant view of yourself.
You are no more politically relevant than me; though if your votes truly are based on no higher principle than just being "on the winning team", then maybe you are a bit less relevant.
Don't hit the abuse button. It is just so gay. Make your point, if you think the poster is worthy of you. Most of these trash posts really aren't worthy of comment or notice, and ignoring them is the best policy. They are self impeaching. Go after smart, well informed posters with whom you disagree. Elevate the debate. Isn't that a better use of one's time? JMO.
Cleaning out trolls from the forum is part of normal housekeeping. I don't hit the abuse button often, but when it is appropriate - as it most certainly is here - then I will use it. This is not the first thread where MNJohnnie has posted this exact same anti-conservative spiel, just review his posts, it is on many different threads. And considering Jim himself is in the class of FReepers who is being attacked, I find the mod behavior downright odd.
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.