Posted on 03/16/2002 10:01:26 PM PST by StopDemocratsDotCom
It took a while for Bush to win over Conservatives who now support him all way. That's why I hate it when the word RHINO is thrown left and right when talking about a Republican who may do something that seems out of step with what we agree with and we don't realize that politics is all about winning and looking like a "centrist"
Check out this 1999 Article:
Conservative talkmeister Rush Limbaugh blasted away at George W. Bush with both barrels today, stoking a possible clash between grass-roots conservatives and the front-running candidate who is already pursuing a centerist general election strategy.
"He's really wandered off the reservation here lately folks," Limbaugh intoned, before making the case against the recent Bush positioning.
"In my mind," he told his listeners, "no conservative running for president would make the kind of statements that he's made. No conservative running for president would leave his philosophical brothers and sisters dying on the congressional battlefield the way Bush did with that EITC (Earned Income Tax Credit) thing. And now he's done it again with the speech at the Manhattan Institute. He's done it twice in seven or eight days time."
"This obviously is a carefully crafted strategy." Limbaugh continued. "What it means is that solid conservatives from Tom DeLay to Dick Armey, who are doing all they can to eke out small majorities and beat back Clinton and all his Big Government schemes-issue after issue-end up being emasculated by Bush's comments."
"Who wants a Republican moderate as president?" Limbaugh asked, a question the Bush camp must hope that other conservatives don't begin asking.
That's the gist of their arguments. That's why I skim past the nonsensical criticisms of G.W.
Another conservative black and I were talking yesterday, and she was worried about the voucher programs and Bush's apparent failure to support them even after he said he would during the campaign. I told her that there is a case right now before the Supreme Court concerning the voucher initiatives in Cleveland and Detroit. That decision is paramount to the rest of the issue. If SCOTUS knocks down the issue as "unconstitutional," then, what would be the point in trying to get the issue through Congress?
She, apparently unconvinced, said that I might be spinning for Bush. But she did say that I had a point that the SCOTUS decision weighs heavily on the issue.
I then asked her, "Well, if I have a point about the court, how am I spinning?" To that she could not answer.
She, along with a ton of other conservatives, crumbles whenever conservatism appears to be "sold out." I must remind fellow conservatives that the Presidency is but one of the three branches of our government. The President is not king or queen, and can not govern by fiat. He has to deal with Congress. The Prez sometimes has to give a little in order to get a little. That's just the political game. Don't believe me? Then read Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince and you'll begin to understand.
CFR? Won't make his desk. Have you all noticed that this issue, which was white hot only a few short weeks ago, has vanished as a topic being discussed on news shows? If you have, have you questioned why this is so?
Steel tarriffs? Pure politics. They make no economic sense, but they sure made political sense. Take Ohio, for instance. Steel workers there are jubilant over the tarriffs. Ohio went for Bush in 2000. And believe you me, those 25 electoral votes the Bush team still wants in 2004.
Immigration and this so-called "amnesty?" Puh-leeze! 245(i) states that those illegals must ASK for amnesty. And, if you think about it, it makes sense as a starting point for reigning in the problem that the INS created decades ago. To wit, it's not right for those illegals who have played by the rules to be thrown out. That's simply unfair. Who knows just how backed up the bureaucracy is in the INS? Give those a fair chance to get their houses in order, THEN you'll have the political cover for an immigration purge. And a purge is definitely needed. 245(i) does NOT just bestow blanket amnesty on ANYONE! But you wouldn't know that by reading FR lately.
Lastly, but most importantly regarding G.W.'s actions, he was thrown a serious monkey wrench by the Jeffords defection. Now, this does not mean that if Jeffords would have stayed that Bush would have everything elementarily easy. The majority was still a majority of one, and we have enough squishes to thwart many conservative initiatives (Spector, Jeffords, Snowe, etc.). But conservatives would have had the important chairs of all Senate committees. Pickering's nomination would have went to the floor and subsequently approved. But, thanks to Jeffords, can't do it. This fact is NOT Bush's fault, and I do cut him some slack on that.
Think I have no criticism of G.W.? Think again. His team politically dropped the ball on Judge Pickering. I mean they blew it, BIG TIME! Bush was late in his vocal support of Pickering. Pickering was not only a great judge, but a political goldmind to boot! Think of it for a sec. Here you had a judge from a Southern state who went against, at his own detriment, Klan members. He had the serious support of American blacks in his district in Mississippi. I mean, what more could you ask for as a conservative? And the thing that irks me the most about this failure is that G.W. and the team could have absolutely hammered the RATS with this nomination. I mean they could have shaken the foundation of the RAT base: American black voters. The bully pulpit could have been the platform with which to spread the truth about Judge Pickering, his true record on the bench, the support he enjoys among blacks in his district, and the strength of the conservative message overall.
All I can do is shake my head over this failure to act upon this fine judge, and along with it spread the message of hope that conservatism truly is.
In closing, President George W. Bush is doing wonderfully well. And just as I will not divorce my wife over one issue in which we disagree, I will not withdraw my support for him if I don't get everything I want for him to accomplish. And don't think I'm a Republican, either. I'm not. I'm a conservative, for sure. But I'm not a Republican. Even so, Bush has my support.
Says more about you, culero, than it does about me.
If you can't, shove off.
You've already tried this "guilt-by-association" crap. Sorry, kid, it won't work.
Now quit acting like a total LIE-BERAL jerk and behave yourself.
You are one sorry stupid bimbo. You are! You can go scream to Robinson and try and get me kicked off the forum, but I call em like I see em.
Checking your profile page we see a prominent link to the League of the South, which is a CERTIFIED HATE GROUP.
So please do tell us - What have you been up to ?? Huh?
...if you cannot provide anything I MYSELF HAVE SAID THAT CAN BE CONSTRUED AS ANTI-SEMITIC (and you WON'T, because I'm NOT), then shut your trap and blow away.
You are disrupting this thread with an attempt at a personal attack. There STILL exists a couple of rules here about that sort of behavior.
I don't intend to push the abuse button, because there is nothing you can allege about me personally that can't be refuted.
So why don't you just stick to the subject and quit stalking me like some kind of frothing Thought Policeman?
I thought you were less of a creep than that, FreedomWins.
(BTW, why DID you change your screenname?)
Provocative views you have there, Vincent.
But I do know, Murray would have never been kicked off some second rate web site like the Ether Zone.
Things like:Oh, and were gonna have to nuke Africa and Asia. Their breeders outnumber us AND they are the growing, hungry, migrant, illiterate, uneducable majority. And we cant stop it. Thats why George sounds more like Fidel Castro than Barry Goldwater. Found HERE
And then this little gem:They tell me I'm a hero but confess they don't think they have the talent, the voice, nor the courage to help in the war for White Christian America. They want to do something - anything to help. Where to sign up? What to bring? Who to write to? Where to start? Found HERE
I guess Carol thinks only whites are Christians, huh?
The list of lovely thought from CW could go on. She is a bitch, Merc. A worthless bitch.
Gad...he just must HATE it when that happens. Hehehe...
What are you doing up this late? I can't sleep myself. But I guess you are 4 hours behind me so I guess it isn't late.
Doesn't appear your League of the South has a problem with Jews, Vincent. Seem to be more concerned with skin color by the looks of it.
You must agree.
Your hate must be blinding you.
The Southern League mourns the death of Murray N. Rothbard, professor, author, scholar, and champion of liberty. Murray was a Charter member of the League and had long been an ardent supporter of the South. His death on 7 January 1995 at age 68 deprived us of a courageous and fearless fighter in the war for the restoration of ordered liberty. It was Murray who suggested the name Southern Patriot for our newsletter, and he was looking forward to contributing many articles. A man of his talents simply cannot be replaced. We must try as best we can to fill the breach left by his absence, redouble our efforts, and press on. Murray would expect nothing less of us. May God rest his soul.
The Southern League will hold its 1995 annual national conference in Nashville, Tennessee, 2-3 June, at the Stouffer Renaissance Hotel. The program on Friday will run from 9 am-noon and from 2-5 PM. Saturday's session will run from 9 am-noon. For reservations call 1-800-HOTELS1 or (615) 255-8400. To get our special rates, be sure and mention that you are with The Southern League. Reservations should be made prior to May 4. Registration fees of $25.00 per person payable by check or money order should be mailed to the Tuscaloosa office by May 15, 1995. We look forward to seeing you in Nashville.
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.