Conservatives not satisfied with Bush's record

The Washington Times ^ | June 18, 2002 | Ralph Z. Hallow

[jimkress]

Conservative lawmakers and activists disappointed with President Bush's first 18 months in office are calling into question his tactics and strategy in advancing the conservative agenda.

"The president for the most part has been our guy," said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, Texas Republican and a prominent conservative on Capitol Hill. "A few times we disagree."

[Poohbah]

Congratulations. You have demonstrated an abject inability to understand how primary and general elections differ.

[freeeee]

If you don't get what you want then pack your bags and leave.

Say you hired someone to cut your lawn. But instead of doing what you hired him to do, he digs great big holes, tears out your flowerbed, spraypaints his name on the fence, and urinates on the pegonias.

Do you keep him on as your landscaper and pay him his salary plus a big fat tip, or do you fire him and hire someone else?

We 'pay' politicians with out votes. If we keep 'paying' them to do a horrible job, then a horrible job they will do. Why should they change when there are no negative consequences from their 'boss'?

The Republican party's 'front yard' looks like vandals have had at it for years. I think its time they found a new groundskeeper.

[Digger]

Good job. I'm waiting for the rebuttle. Sounds to me like checkmate.

[Pistias]

GW is a good man being led astray by bad advisors who may have their own agenda

They used to say that about kings in France. Enables one to revile the government while loving the ruler.

[Poohbah]

I suppose you think the conservative base was energized to come out to the polls and vote against McCain in the semi's, but not Gore in the finals.

That's exactly how it happened. That's how we got a divided Senate.

[Taiwan Bocks]

"The president for the most part has been our guy,"

Not that you care about what true Constitution loving,
God-fearing,
patriotic Americans think;

But somewhere around your, Mr. Bush's, last sodomite appointee,
or the Education (PORK) budget,
maybe it was Laura's "Hillary moment" commenting on "THE FENCE" the day before so many were murdered...
or was it since we heard the military was TOLD NOT TO SCRAMBLE TO INTERCEPT THE HIJACKED PLANES ON 9-11, one of those events sealed it,
I thought I was Republican forever,

But you lost me and a lot of me's like me, Mr. Ex CIA Director's son.

[elmer fudd]

Agree 100%. If he has the cajones to let the assault weapons ban die in a presidential election year he'll have earned my vote, especially if he vetoes it. If he vetoes it he'll be my hero. If he renews it with Republican support though I'll just wash my hands of the whole party. If he renews it with the vast majority of Republicans opposed, then I'll be a little more selective in who I vote for.

[old school]

Needless to say, the word "democrat" is synonymous with the word liberal; but the word republican is not neccessarily synonymous with the word conservative. GW was elected by conservatives and not to acknowledge that fact is quite foolish! "Let's get something straight, sport: four MILLION conservatives sat out Election 1992, or voted third party, or even voted for Ross Perot!"

[Sloth]

Then again, if control of both houses do pass to the Republicans and nothing is done ... then I will stand naked in this forum and truly eat crow.

Get ready for some crow. GOP taking both houses is doable. But it's irrational to expect anything out of them except a slower march toward the left.

[Poohbah]

Do you mind authenticating this figure for me?

It was the subject of an extensively-Freeper-discussed poll from early 2001.

[Corin Stormhands]

The non-presence of the base in 2000 ultimately cost us the Senate.

And Trent Lott's "Henry don't bring your trash over here," remark is what kept a lot of that base at home.

I was one of the loudest screaming at the third party conservatives in 2000. I'll still vote for Bush, but I won't be screaming in 2004.

[SerpentDove]

I'll go to the polls and pull the lever for Bush next time, probably.

But will I enthusiastically campaign for him at the grassroots level, like I did last time?

No way.

[hchutch]

That is part of it, IMO. Another part was that DUI smear that that DNC delegate pulled off in Maine the week before the election. That was probably just as bad, and it killed Bush's coattails, too.

[Palmetto]

You have demonstrated an abject inability to understand how primary and general elections differ.

I know exactly how they differ. To wit:

Winning the primaries requires only that you appeal heavily to your base (in Pres. GWB's case, the right-wingers), making promises that "push their buttons."

Winning the general election requires turning on the dime and ignoring your base, while appealing to those who voted against you in the primaries (the liberal RINOs who voted for McCain), and appealing to those who otherwise agree with your new, more liberal opponent.

Isn't that how Pres. Bush won?

[FourtySeven]

I used to criticize Bush for his CFR debacle, but now I'm not so sure. After thinking about it, what could he have done about it? Veto it and then be persecuted for doing so during the 2004 election? Sure, many here on FR say he should have done that anyway, because it's a matter of principle. But we here at FR tend to forget sometimes that the true conservative isn't in the majority in this country; we don't even have much of a base in the Republican party itself. Thus, unless we want to have NO conservative in the Oval Office, we shouldn't punish him for that one mistake (and it was a mistake). As far as the "principle" of the matter goes, when have you known ANY politician that has total principle? Anyone who believes that is living a pipe dream in my opinion. Even if the Libertarian candidate for President were to be elected someday, he'd eventually fall to the same "politics as usual" in Washington; at least Bush seems to play the game well.

As far as the other issues raised in this article, I don't really have a problem with any. For example, certainly the Education bill is the largest ever, but at least the National Testing got through, and I think that might have been more important then any voucher program. (I never really supported the idea of vouchers anyway; I don't know how even strict Constitutionalists can support that idea). The national testing is important though, because it's a step in the right direction: FINALLY holding accountable (if only in a small way) the TEACHERS for their performance.

In conclusion, I don't think Bush is a bad job. I AM disappointed that he broke his campgain promise and signed CFR, but if he hadn't, there would be this tremendous, LIBERAL feeding frenzy, that may have even hampered the war effort,(because a great many of Bush's proposed wartime legistlation/funding may have gotten tied up in Congress as a backlash) and thus, could have maybe even put us in physical danger. Not to mention John McCain would've had a perfect springboard for 2004, and I think most, if not all of us here, can thank the LORD he didn't win the primaries in 2000. We can all see now, that despite any liberal underpinnings Mr. Bush might have, McCain would've made him look like Spiro Agnew.

[weikel]

Neocons are right on foreign policy and wrong on everything else. Basically they are liberals who figured out the left was irrational but are not quite sure what it was irrational about.

[finnman69]

Congress is full of a bunch of people who only care about themselves and their money. This article is a bunch of Crap!

Agreed, Bush can only sign into law bills sent to him by Congress. If you want more conservative agenda passed, you need to have more conservative congressmen. Then again the Bush Bashers would counter Bush should veto everything witha dollar amount to it. Let's be realistic and understand that politics is a scratch your back you scratch my back game.

This article ignores the consistent high conservative Republican support in polling data. 90%+. Have you ever noticed the FreeRepublic phenomenon where the lower your Free Republic ID# is, the more likely you are to Bush bash?

[Lazamataz]

I am a "neo-con," which makes me a spawn-of-Satan RINO to the alleged base because I disagree with some details of their agenda, and they think that I should be stoned to death.

Personally, I think you are overreacting.

You're going to source that 4 million number for me, right?

[Palmetto]

I suppose you think the conservative base was energized to come out to the polls and vote against McCain in the semi's, but not Gore in the finals.

That's exactly how it happened. That's how we got a divided Senate.

We have a divided Senate because Pres. Bush motivated a lot of folks who normally vote Dem. to vote for him.

Now, where does that leave a conservative Senatorial candidate? Attracting liberal types to the voting booth is not a great way to elect conservative congresscritters.

[Poohbah]

And Trent Lott's "Henry don't bring your trash over here," remark is what kept a lot of that base at home.

That was AFTER the GOP got their butts kicked for impeaching a popular President in 1998. Trent had spine in 1995--until he got his butt kicked a few dozen times with no support from the base. He could've had spine had the base turned out in 1998--but he saw that it would be wasted effort.