Conservatives need not fret about Bush

Houston Chronicle ^ | 4/24/02 | George Will

[Cacophonous]

I think Will makes the same mistake many on this forum make -- he confuses Conservative with Republican.

The two are not synonymous. Republicans should be quite pleased with George W Bush...he has been the ideal GOP representative.

Conservatives, and here I mean the paleo- variety, not the neo-, on the other hand have little to applaud, aside from (and this is significant) the way he and his administration has conducted itself in comparison to his predecessor.

[finnman69]

Great article from the most intelligent and eloquent conservative commentator alive.

[Maceman]

I guess Mr. Will has forgotten Richard Nixon

You mean Mr. Wage and Price Controls?

[antidemocommie]

Ahhh, with the poll numbers now in the 60s, fear has taken over. Suddenly, Conservatives count in D.C.

[uncbob]

Other than his hard stance on Communism, Richard Nixon was very liberal. He was pro-choice, instituted government wage and price freezes, and created the EPA.

He wasn't even that hard on the commies
He established DETENTE and opened up trade with China ( a doisaster as far as I am concerned)

Nixon was a conservative WASHOUT

[uncbob]

Probably the worst thing for conservatives is for Bush to be high in the polls . Then he will feel free to abandon his conservative base

Instead of using his high ratings to bo bravely forward he does things like sign CFR . Not a good sign

[jimt]

George, pop your head out. Read my lips.

[FreedomSurge]

What some of us disgruntled sorts are trying to point out is that Bush would be doing even better if he didn't collapse on every issue. If he hadn't signed for steel tariffs, he wouldn't have had to deal with the aftermath of trade war. If he had made a stand on CFR on Constitutional grounds, he likely would have won. He didn't fight for Pickering, the loss is on his head as much as the left's. Any see the reality that standing on principle can actually make you more popular?

[Texbob]

What a load of crap! A conservative did not write this article, it has liberal written all over it.

[Zack Nguyen]

However, Bush has positioned his party as pro-choice where it will matter most to most Americans in coming years -- regarding education (freedom to choose among public and private schools)...

I feel fairly good about Bush, but the above is simply not the case as I understand it. I thought that in his last education bill he abandoned vouchers when it became politically inconvenient.

Bush is not a revolutonary. He will not change the system, he will simply run it as well as he can, more or less from the right.

[sandlady]

bump for later

[texlok]

Conservatives, and here I mean the paleo- variety, not the neo-, on the other hand have little to applaud, aside from (and this is significant) the way he and his administration has conducted itself in comparison to his predecessor.

I'll take sleaze over the PATRIOT ACT/CFR/Immigration/etc. any day. It's sad to even say that.

[Tauzero]

"Bush is not a revolutonary. He will not change the system, he will simply run it as well as he can, more or less from the right."

Bump to that.

[Twodees]

Wrong. Will, like the overmedicated Noonan, is a derivative writer of barely discernible talent who really can't keep a coherent train of thought together for more than a few paragraphs.

Will the Shill is what I've been calling him since '96. He's a dullard, a liberal and a pissant. That makes him exactly what passes as a conservative among republicans. He is marginally more conservative than W, but that isn't saying much.

[=Intervention=]

Agreed. Will is a fool, who tells us to smile as someone we trust betrays principle when it becomes convienient. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Bush II looks more and more like Nixon every day.