Posted on 04/26/2002 1:44:34 PM PDT by Rightfield14
Rush and other pundits are really getting on my nerves. What they don't see is that Bush is trying to control a fire that he is about to make a lot hotter. That region of the world needs to be brought under control so when we go into Iraq our soldiers won't be surrounded in a hostile environment once the shooting stops and Sadam has been toppled. Having a hostile Iran on one side is managable because they will be next. Having a hostile Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Jordan to the north and west might lead to a bloodbath (we will still win). I don't think Bush wants that on his conscience. Something to think about
Carping and criticizing, they idly sit on the sidelines. They never take up arms in defense of their party. They never take the slings and arrows from the opposition. They never attempt to remake the GOP in their conservative image the way liberals have dominated the Democrats.
Excellent essay and an accurate portrait of many of the 'conservative' Bush-bashers on FR.
Never satisified, never mollified, always finding fault. The President never does anything right, in their eyes.
Dreary and negative, name-calling and ridicule their main weapons of disagreement, they hide behind the constitution and wave it in your face if you dare - dare - to praise or defend GW Bush on any issue, for any reason. They do little but complain and accomplish absolutely nothing but unfortunately, they comprise a sizeable portion of this websites posting population.
Some of us are even more concerned about his refusal to be confrontational in important matters of domestic policy, including criminal justice. Even if his famous nice-guy "velvet hammer" approach sort of works in domestic matters, it sort of doesn't.
Some FReepers may be interested in the theological underpinnings of his approach--and why President Bush sometimes does seem to lack the spirit of our founders. To that end, I recommend that lurkers read the final three paragraphs of my post on another thread: (see The Theology of Our Nation's Christian Founders).
Damned with faint praise.
Many conservatives say that Bush is "doing a good job." What exactly does that mean? If you mean that he's "doing a good job" at preserving the status quo, I would agree. If you mean that he's "doing a good job" of bolstering the federal monopoly on public education, I would concede that as well. If, however, you mean to say that he's "doing a good job" of scaling back government and restoring some form of constitutional sanity to Washington I would profoundly disagree. Whether or not Bush restores the public's respect for the office of president is inconsequential. He should work on restoring the public's respect for the principles upon which this nation was built.
Should he and I agree on every issue? Of course not, but the very least I expect from any president is that he live up to the oath he swore before Almighty God to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Pushing for more education spending, stricter environmental regulations and more limits on free speech (a.k.a. Campaign Finance Reform) doesn't help.
And it will be because of Bush 43.
So those of us who criticize unconstitutional policies are regarded as Bush-Bashers? Would that make Bush and his supporters Constitution-Bashers?
Isn't Scalia's first name 'Antonin'?
Sounds picky, I know, but I would also object to reading about "Wilbur F. Buckley" in an article written by a conservative.
But some things in his Presidency reveal a peculiar failing in Presidential integrity itself. For example, he promised to "scrub" the Oval Office. But he has actually blocked the scrubbing--all of it, as far as I can tell.
(It's almost as if President Bush presumes that his presence in the Oval Office is the scrubbing. But it's really not. Merely changing Presidents doesn't eliminate the stains in his office or on our nation.
The Truth would go a long ways toward fixing the problem. And the truth is, our nation's founders would have tarred and feathered Clinton. And they would have tarred and feathered the guys who refused to tar and feather Clinton.
Our nation is far removed from the principles of our founders.)
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.