Another One Term Bush in the Making

Sierra Times ^ | Colonel Dan

[Sir Gawain]

-

[Clemenza]

The farm bill and CFR REALLY PISSED ME OFF!!!

[Diogenesis]

Sadly, President Bush first adopted Hillary's demand for a Palestinian State.

Then he adopted proterrorist demands.

[SoDak]

Actually, I'm hoping the tide turns the other way after the mid-term elections, and that these early forays into the dem policy book are long term aberrations. It seems as though conventional thinking in the oval office has changed. The thinking now is that you remain in office by co-opting the opponents issues and making them your own.

[Alberta's Child]

The author's premise is all wrong. Straddling the political fence is the kind of thing that should result in a one-term presidency. What we have learned over the last 12 years, though, is that so many American voters are so lacking in principle that fence-straddling is rewarded at the voting booth.

Many conservatives complain that President Bush is "just like Bill Clinton." Maybe he's just like post-1994 Bill Clinton, but if you look back at Clinton's last six years in office from a purely political standpoint and neglect his legal troubles, you'd think the guy was a Republican president. His "Democratic" hat is what gave him the cover to do things that Republican presidents never would have gotten away with from a PR-standpoint (e.g. welfare reform, capital gains tax cuts, etc.)

[Sir Gawain]

so many American voters are so lacking in principle

Sadly, I think you're correct.

[w_over_w]

IMHO, if GWB can concede "something’s" now in exchange for retaking the Senate . . . much of what has been passed with CFR and the Farm Bill can be either be tabled or changed. However, if the DemoRATS keep the Senate . . . God help us. It's politics, it's ugly and it's often what needs to be done in order to achieve the greater good.

BTW, it's strange posting a "serious" reply to Sir Gawain . . . I mean you're one of the original "funny guys".

[Smedley]

His "Democratic" hat is what gave him the cover to do things that Republican presidents never would have gotten away with from a PR-standpoint (e.g. welfare reform, capital gains tax cuts, etc.)

Bill Clinton fought those measures tooth and nail. Bad examples, but I understand what you mean. NAFTA and GATT would be better examples.

[txzman]

"Straddling the political fence is the kind of thing that should result in a one-term presidency. What we have learned over the last 12 years, though, is that so many American voters are so lacking in principle that fence-straddling is rewarded at the voting booth.

Yeah but the problem in American Politics from the conservative side is that we stay home on principal when we are left behind - that is what loses elections for the Republicans. This article is right on target - Bush has already lost my parent's vote in the next election, and he will have to work hard to get it back.

My Dad still votes on what a man does, not what he says he believes in or what he will do. I like Bush, but his appeasement policies are very troubling for me as well.

[JFoxbear]

The simple truth can sometimes be quite distatefull.

However sickening... Colonel Dan is an honest man on this one, as usual.

[pgkdan]

The Fram Bill, CFR, Mental health parity for insurance, steel tarriffs, failing to fight for Judicial nominees, failure to close the borders, "Islam is Peace", The Education Bill, the failure to get vouchers passed...the list goes on and on. He's a complete disappointment so far. The only good thing about this administration as far as I can see are Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Condi Rice...the rest, including W, can fade into the sunset for all I care.

[Digger]

I agree.

[alpowolf]

It's politics, it's ugly and it's often what needs to be done in order to achieve the greater good

This is always said when a Republican abandons principles. I don't think it's at all unfair to ask: what greater good are we going to get, and when are we going to get it?

As House elections occur every two years we're always told "well we have to compromise now, elections are coming up." Elections are always coming up...so we keep hearing "tactics, comrades, tactics!"

[rdavis84]

"What then does this predict for America? It's simple; Hillary could become number 44 and Bush would be back on his ranch clearing brush while America suffers even more."

It's obvious to some of us that jr. really doesn't care. He's doing his part to usher in his daddy's NWO/World Rearrangement and most are giving him a pass on it.

Hillary will do the Heavy Lifting just like Slick did, then it's done. But that won't stop the bandwagon riders from yelling "lesser of two evils", "better than Gore (Hillary)", and continuing to delude themselves that there's a difference in the two/one Party.

[lormand]

"The farm bill and CFR REALLY PISSED ME OFF!!!"

Don't forget his massive Teddy Kennedy approved Education bill, the Airport/Union Security Act, and his continuted support for granting illegal aliens amnesty, which is pure racial pandering.

I will gladly vote for a better choice in the Republican primaries in 04'.

[GraniteStateConservative]

What-- is GWB going to get even less of the popular vote in 2004 because conservatives stay home? Conservatives should be doing backflips for any attention paid to us. Millions stayed home on Election Day and almost delivered the presidency to Gore. I wouldn't blame Bush at all for wanting to develop a more loyal base.

Conservatives can be pig-headed and stubborn and think nothing of cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Had we given Bush a landslide victory, he'd be beholden to us. What do we have to hold over his head? Nothing. We decided to play checkers on Election Day-- rather than crawl over broken glass [to rebuke Clinton with our last opportunity] as some commentators predicted in 2000.

Bush shouldn't view conservatives as vital to him until we actually accomplish something. Since 1994, it's been downhill all the way-- re-electing Clinton and vanishing numbers in the House and Senate (which we lost after having owned it), and giving the Democrats the popular vote for the third straight presidential election.

[lormand]

"The Fram Bill, CFR, Mental health parity for insurance, steel tarriffs, failing to fight for Judicial nominees, failure to close the borders, "Islam is Peace", The Education Bill, the failure to get vouchers passed...the list goes on and on. He's a complete disappointment so far. The only good thing about this administration as far as I can see are Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Condi Rice...the rest, including W, can fade into the sunset for all I care."

You know, it is just dawning on me that Dubya IS John McCain! We have in effect, John McCain as POTUS! What is the difference?

[Timesink]

This is always said when a Republican abandons principles. I don't think it's at all unfair to ask: what greater good are we going to get, and when are we going to get it?

Never, if the RATs get back into power. Let Bush play the game, and come January the RATs will be completely out of power on the federal level for the first time since 1933. Let him not play the game and the Dems will keep the Senate and just possibly (though probably not) win the House too. Then we'll REALLY be getting no greater good.

[Charlotte Corday]

First time around, I voted for Bush based on what he said he was going to do.

Second time around, it depends on what he has done, which amounts to:

Taking out the Taliban - very big plus item on the ledger.
The rest of the "war on terror" is basically ineffectual or downright harmful to our freedoms. Medium size minus.
Drunken-sailor domestic spending - medium size minus.
CFR - Big minus.
Tax cut - accomplished but trivial in size and scope. Very small plus.
Fighting for his judicial nominees - effort too small to grade.

Jury's still out, and there are over two years to go, but I suspect that had it not been for 9/11 it would be awfully hard to tell the difference between Bush's "achievements" and what Gore would have been able to do (given a Republican House (possibly) Senate).