Bush Extremely Strong With Base (06/01/2002)

ap via newsday ^ | 5/31/2002 | Will Lester

[TLBSHOW]

WASHINGTON -- Occasional grumbling by some prominent conservatives about President Bush sometimes overshadows his extremely solid support among stalwart Republicans and conservatives around the country.

Many Republicans and Democrats seem to agree that support by itself does not tilt the 2002 elections toward the GOP. Some, however, say it could offset the gains the party out of the White House -- Democrats, in this case -- historically has made in midterm elections.

[BluesDuke]

It is really scary to setting at your computer, sober under no influences and have a pig fly by shouting, "I will never vote for GW again!"

Well, if you heard a pig fly by saying so it is somewhat more distressing than if you heard a human doing so. My own call on Mr. Bush: Too many question marks for comfort, particularly as regards domestic policy. (There are issues which were presumed, once upon a time, to be non-negotiable.) On the other hand, I make note of this much: He did, after all, promise in essence to govern not according to how much government he might get away with cutting or dissolving but, rather, how much he might get away with seeing or even raising, on behalf of the Right Things. And he has, by and large, kept that promise.

In fairness, there are two years and eight months remaining in Mr. Bush's term, and it is still a kind of open question as to whether it will prove to have been his first or his only term. And the coming Congressional and even gubernatorial elections should prove interesting enough so far as fortifying his position. But the road to Democratic hell is paved with Republican good intentions.

[WIMom]

It's kind of funny. All the naysayers were saying prior to the election, GWB has no foreign policy experience. And up to 9-11, he was chugging along with all sorts of domestic issues, while meeting with various heads of states. (You know, relationship building) After 9-11, this strategy had to do a complete 180 regarding foreign issues (good thing he did some relationship building). It reminds me a of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. I don't agree with him 100%, but he's doing better than anyone ever expected. He got off to a great start, and now everyone believes he is capable of so much more when a mere 18 months ago, he was the dufus from Texas.

[Sabertooth]

My own call on Mr. Bush: Too many question marks for comfort, particularly as regards domestic policy.

Bump that.

[WRhine]

The erosion comes from those fringe voters who are completely out of touch with the reality of today's government, people who believe that electing "their guy" will somehow neutralize the Democrats, and Daschle and company will simply fade away into obscurity while "their guy" sits in the Oval Office writing one EO after another, outlawing everything from public schools to decaffeinated coffee, and who will, by the sheer strenght of his convictions, stop women from having abortions, and turn California into a bastion of conservatism.

A little over the top don't ya think? Many conservatives such as myself, who voted for and supported Bush, did so KNOWING he was not a conservative. Where the trouble comes in is that most of us didn't think Bush would: Relentlessly push amnesties for illegal aliens, fail to secure our borders post 9/11, continue to allow immigration from terrorist nations, ban profiling in airports even if a person looks "suspicious", waste valuable political capital by folding on CFR, the Farm Bill and worse, the Education Bill...the list goes on.

Speaking for myself, I would even overlook ALL his caves to the democrats if he showed some real concern about halting the immigration "free for all" America has been on in the last 3 decades. But when you add it all up, it is increasingly becoming very, very, difficult for MANY conservatives to support this president.

And I'd be a little careful about reading too much into polls given that the election is still a long ways off. In fact, given Bush's very strong numbers, I’d say he has reached a high water mark and faces considerable downside from here on out.

[billva]

I can't claim credit, Texasforever wrote it.

Nice post Texasforever.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Many conservatives such as myself, who voted for and supported Bush, did so KNOWING he was not a conservative."

When you get right down to it, there's only one true conservative, and that would be me...unless of course, you are in complete agreement with my stance on every single issue, and the method needed to be used to arrive at the only solutions to the problems we face that I consider acceptable. In spite of whatever anyone else in this country may think.

There's a point to all that.

"Where the trouble comes in is that most of us didn't think Bush would: Relentlessly push amnesties for illegal aliens..."

We won't discuss the meaning of the word "amnesty" here, but we will at the very least agree that it was not the broad "anything goes, anyone stays" agenda that it's been made out to be. There were fairly level-headed guidelines for qualification, and meeting those guidelines only secured a hearing, not automatic "amnesty".

"...fail to secure our borders post 9/11..."

That's a complete matter of opinion, if by that you mean shut down the borders...that will never happen. If you mean mine the place troops there in violation of the Posse Commitatus Act...that will never happen, short of the possibility of a MILITARY invasion.

If by that you mean mine the border (it's a fairly popular solution among some) so that we can blow unarmed women and children to pieces in front of CNN's cameras, that will never happen. And none of those things will happen with anyone in the White House.

Points of entry are being guarded much more than prior to 9/11, some more work is required in that area, but there is a need to maintain a proper balance between security, and still being America. Funding is being cut-off from the unconstitutional (an widely supported by people who also call themselves "true conservatives") War on Drugs, and is being directed at the Border Patrol so that THEY can better do the job they're supposed to be doing.

"...continue to allow immigration from terrorist nations..."

There are no "terrorist nations", there are terrorists, there are terrorist organizations, and there are governments that support terrorism and terrorists. There are also active terrorists from friendly nations.

"...ban profiling in airports even if a person looks "suspicious"

I'm not a very "suspicious" looking person, and I've been checked before boarding every flight I've been on since 9/11. If you truly want airports secured, then a guessing game isn't it. Check everyone.

"...waste valuable political capital by folding on CFR...

Most of the things that I recall Bush talking about "wanting" in a CFR bill are there, there are some things that shouldn’t be there. I expect them to have a short half-life, and the fact that portions of bill bearing his name will be found to be unconstitutional, is going to wreak havoc on McCain's next run at the presidency.

"...the Farm Bill and worse, the Education Bill...the list goes on."

We didn't win every battle against Germany or Japan in WWII, but they eventually lost the war.

We are at the very beginning of the war to turn liberalism back, about eighteen moths into it, to be exact.

If you believed that the Dems would fold, and simply get out of Bush's way so that we could accomplish every single one of our goals in less than two years, then you fooled yourself.

If you fail to see the good already done by this administration: openly advocating life, openly supporting the 2nd. Amendment rights of Americans to bear arms, saying NO! to globalist courts, taxes, treaties and organizations that sought to diminish our sovereignty, raising military morale...I'm sure some will add to the list...then you are being less than honest in your criticism.

I have a personal guideline, I have to agree with XX% of what a president does, to expect 100% would be ridiculous, I don't even agree with 100% of the things that I do.

[monday]

"I guess my only message is this. We're not all half-assed former supporters who are one issues voters or fair weather friends. Some of us were hard core Bush supporters. I worked on Jebs campaign as a memeber of the Broward Republican Party and as a member of the Broward Young Repubicans. I, along with other freepers on this forum attended many protests during the attempted Gore election takeover. One guy I know has been a GOP delegate for years feels the same way many of us do. We're not all fakes, or disruptors, or one-issue voters. Many of us are truly disgusted at being betrayed on issue after issue after issue. We think the huge spending, all of the newly created bureaucracies, the unconstitutional non-vetoes, the refusal to secure our borders and the breaking of campaing promises to be drastically opposed to our deeply held beliefs on where this country should be going."

Well said. I have learned to stay silent(mostly) on these threads, as emotions tend to run a little high, but what you wrote was very well written and exactly the way I see Bush.

I didn't expect him to be perfect, but his promises to limit gov't growth and spending during his campaign have turned into a parody of the typical Politician. A complete disconnect between what is promised and what is delivered. Its very disappointing.

[WRhine]

I actually agree with most of what you said. Good Post.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"I didn't expect him to be perfect, but his promises to limit gov't growth and spending during his campaign have turned into a parody of the typical Politician."

When you were listening to his campaign promises, didn't you bother factoring in the costs that the attack on 9/11 would bring about?

[BluesDuke]

All the naysayers were saying prior to the election, GWB has no foreign policy experience. And up to 9-11, he was chugging along with all sorts of domestic issues, while meeting with various heads of states.

I have to say this much at least: Whatever I did or did not think of his prospective governance watching and listening to his campaign, I never thought he was the dolt he was caricatured to be. I did, however, think that he might well prove along the line of his father, concerning the balance between foreign and domestic policy; he certainly didn't have the experience going in that his father had had regarding foreign matters, but that isn't always an indicator of someone's aptitude for them.

If anything, I am more of the mind that, as regards domestic policy, the proper enough place for the federal government is, simply enough, to butt the hell out; the properly-construed Constitution imposes very considerable limitations thereupon. And, to mind its primary mission of protecting the United States and her citizens against enemies real and prospective from abroad. I think that had that been adhered to strictly enough - and, well enough before Mr. Bush assumed office - we might not have had to contend among other things with a 9/11.

There are yet two years and eight months to go in Mr. Bush's term. It is like a baseball pennant race in this regard: it ain't over until it's over. From here and now, practically anything can happen; from November-January, of course, depending upon how the Congressional and even gubernatorial contests do or do not turn, that "anything" could become something different enough, particularly if there emerges any further sense that what we once considered the intractable enough Republican issue foundation of very limited government has become, if not extinct, then at least shadowed enough. And the road to Democratic hell is paved with Republican good intentions.

[nanny]

• Immigration
• Education Bill
• CFR
• Farm Bill
• Touchy-feely 'tolerance' messages post 9/11
• Ridiculous increase in foreign aid
• There is the new 'Center for Understanding Islam and Democracy'
• Continued visas for middle eastern men taking flight lessons
• Making airport screeners federal employees and as a result, citizens

  There surely must be more, but those are quite enough for me.

[Torie]

Well except for Dems, the rest are getting rather thin on the ground, which means the neocons will go the way of the Shakers. The definition is silly, because it is not about views, but rather about pedigree. Kristol fils is viewed typically as a neocon, and yet he would be excluded from your definition. Others limit the defintion to Jews. As a Wasp Neocon that has gradually moved left over my life, of course I reject all these definitions. The correct definition is one that focuses more on a empirical view of what government should do, and not do, rather than an a priori one, based on a world view of respect for individualism and Western values.

[F16Fighter]

"I want us to control the senate after this election, then start to pull the Rino weeds out."

Amen brother, but aren't we gonna need an industrial-size roto-tiller?

And BTW, I'm just an admirer of the F-16, and all American combat aircraft and their pilots...

[F16Fighter]

Hmmmm, a very tidy, yet inexplicably disturbing list of which we would normally expect of a Democratic Administration.

But, ssshhh....don't dwell on these "small potatoes" too much lest you be accused of mutiny and treason.

[Grampa Dave]

I posted, "I want us to control the senate after this election, then start to pull the Rino weeds out."

You posted, Amen brother, but aren't we gonna need an industrial-size roto-tiller?

Actually a huge Rotor Rooter will be needed.

Most of these Rino bastards have rooted heavily down into the sewers below what a tiller can reach. Just look at those NE states with RINOs from Canada to DC. They have been Rinoing so long, they are like a protected species.

They should be endangered re their positions as Rino Senators.

[Torie]

Without the Rino's, Bush wouldn't have a hope of getting any of his more conservative judicial appellate and SCOTUS nominees confirmed. You should be blowing them wet kisses, particularly since only the Rino variation of the Pubbie species can be elected typically in most of their native habitat. This conservative jihad thing is really quite silly. In this day and age, partisan that it is, Pubbies only go Rino to the extent necessary to survive. I can think of very few exceptions to this rule. Do you hear the Dems bitching about Dino's?

[F16Fighter]

"Do you hear the Dems bitching about Dino's?"

But then again, the Dems are hardly interested in principles in the first place, are they? Unless it is the principle that to be a pro-life Democrat is worse than being a leper. Yet "pro-choice" is a predictable requisite for a RINO, an opinion perfectly acceptable within the GOP.

[Texasforever]

But then again, the Dems are hardly interested in principles in the first place

You do know that the term "principle" is one of the MOST subjective terms in the English language and that it is many times used to describe an individual's on hard headed insistence that others are "un-principled" if they disagree with them?

[Terriergal]

I still think he's awfully popular. I don't agree with what he did on those either. I thought the article was trying to say he wasn't popular with the Republican base? I sure think he is. If so then I don't agree with the Republican base. But he is still IMO like a breath of fresh air compared to 8 years of Clinton.

If you are thinking about bailing as I am, I would urge you to at least check out www.constitutionparty.com

[F16Fighter]

"You do know that the word 'principle' is one the MOST subjective terms in the English language..."

Just as the word 'truth' has become "subjective."

That's the problem -- the entire English language has been hijacked and subverted to infer all definitions themselves are relative..

Prime example: Islam -- 'Religion of Peace.'...Another: Senator Lieberman -- The 'conscience of the Democratic Party.'