Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Conservatives, Cut Bush Slack
The Chicago Sun-Times ^ | June 22, 2002 | Thomas Roeser

Posted on 06/22/2002 9:46:05 AM PDT by quidnunc

This summer will mark the 47th year since I took my first Republican job: as public relations director for the party in Minnesota. Since then I have rarely strayed from politics, or my party. I served as a staffer to two GOP congressmen, to a GOP governor, as a federal appointee to Richard Nixon and as a corporate executive who supported in Washington and Springfield much, if not all, of the Republican agenda.

You can describe me as a conservative. Thus I am qualified to say that although I dearly love conservatives, they tend to be querulous, disagreeable and threaten revolt when Republican office-holders don't please them. So it is now with George W. Bush. Here is a president who has surprised us all with the firmness and resolve he showed after 9/11. I must tell you I voted for him with less enthusiasm than I had for many of his predecessors. But his administration has pleased me often — most notably on two issues: defense of America and social policy.

Yet, Bush has to get re-elected in a country that is evenly divided on philosophy. Thus he must occasionally — on matters that sometimes offend conservatives — dip into the other side's ideology for support. He has done so on three notable occasions: on the issue of steel protectionism, where he departed his free-market proclamations; on the signing of a campaign finance bill tailored by his enemies, and allowing his attorney general (in the words of Libertarian Nat Hentoff in the Washington Times) "to send disguised agents into religious institutions, libraries and meetings of citizens critical of government policy without a previous complaint, or reason to believe that a crime has been committed."

In a perfect political world, where conservatives are in the majority, these things would be sufficient to encourage a boycott of the polls. Either that or a protest vote for the Democratic opposition. But we are not in a perfect world. We conservatives have a president who didn't receive a majority of the votes, and has one house of Congress against him. He must make compromises to get re-elected. Conservatives who do not understand the nature of politics ought to stay in their air-conditioned ivory towers and refrain from political activity altogether. If they cannot adjudge the stakes in this election and the difference between Bush and an Al Gore or a John Kerry (D-Mass.) or a Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), they are foolish indeed.

-snip-

To read the remainder of this op/ed open the article via the link provided in the thread's header.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,041-1,0601,061-1,0801,081-1,100 ... 2,241-2,242 next last
To: Reagan Man
I guess that will never happen....since I don't speak Eubonics.

Sad......

redrock

1,061 posted on 06/22/2002 11:13:14 PM PDT by redrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1053 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Good evening Luis, here we go eh? I hope not...=o)

There is a big difference between hammering out a give and take compromise with Demoncrats, and giving away the farm, for free. Reagan understood this difference. Here is another quote on a subject he refused to compromise on.

"A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply swell its numbers...And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way."--Ronald Reagan

Unfortunately, things have completely reversed and now conservatives are being invited to leave the Party.

1,062 posted on 06/22/2002 11:14:42 PM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 921 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
All we are looking for right now is a sense that our leaders are fighting for our agenda, and not that of our enemies

These were your words.....right?

Indeed they were. If you would read them in context, and if you had an open mind, you would understand what I'm saying.

CFR was the plan of our political 'enemies'...but was accomplished with the assistance of many Republicans...including the President.

The education bill was Teddy Kennedy's wet dream...and was accomplished with the support of many Republicans...including the President.

Tom Harkin has been trying to pass his version of the the Soviet five year plan for agriculture for the last 30 years...and got it done this year, with the help of Republicans, including the President.

With Reagan, we always had the sense that he was fighting for our agenda, even if he didn't always succeed. I believe he would have vetoed all three of those bills, personally.

1,063 posted on 06/22/2002 11:14:58 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1052 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf
Read the much hated patriot act. Look at the Homeland Security plan, that you all hate with such a passion, that makes the INS enforcement arm separate from the INS welcome wagon,. Look at the recent sweeps of illegals at the airports. Then come back and apologize.

1,064 posted on 06/22/2002 11:15:06 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1056 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Reagan Man wrote: You're always good for a good laugh once a night, bucko.

Boss! Boss! tpaine, tpaine!

1,065 posted on 06/22/2002 11:15:16 PM PDT by quidnunc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1060 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Don't know if it helps or not...but it is very sad that the very act of asking simple basic questions is viewed as something bad.

redrock

1,066 posted on 06/22/2002 11:16:02 PM PDT by redrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1058 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Seems kindof wierd that the boys that always claim to be beating the pants off you guys always seem to stoop to using terms like gormless twit sooner or later.
1,067 posted on 06/22/2002 11:16:37 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1043 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
He has the best aides and office staff also. I called his office after the Jeffords debacle to complain which is when I found out that his PAC had donated $10,000 to the Jeffords campaign AFTER Jeffords came around looking for support. I thought I was mad, but the woman I talked to was madder than I was!

Same was true of impeachment. I still have his letter explaining how Democrat Senators and some Republicans would not even go look at the evidence and had no intention of voting to remove Clinton so they ignored evidence and the votes were NEVER going to be there to remove. They would not budge. NOTE: Not one DemocRAT voted to remove!

Recently he has taken on ms. clinton twice quite publically even though the mainstream press chose to ignore it. If there were a lot more Senators like him and Sen Inhofe, the United States Senate would be a lot better place.


1,068 posted on 06/22/2002 11:16:40 PM PDT by PhiKapMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1046 | View Replies]

To: All
A good night to all.
1,069 posted on 06/22/2002 11:17:15 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1063 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
You know good and well that "meanspirited" is what the liberals called Rush during the early 90's. You've called me a "reactionary" plenty of times as well. I admit that the "running dogs" part was hyperbole, but you're a fun target because you take yourself so seriously.
1,070 posted on 06/22/2002 11:18:03 PM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 998 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
Thank you, ma'am. I'll look it over.
1,071 posted on 06/22/2002 11:19:16 PM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1000 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
So you really didn't mean it. OK.
1,072 posted on 06/22/2002 11:19:34 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1063 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
If you want to take a swipe at me, at least PING me so I can respond in kind. You've been here long enough to know better.
1,073 posted on 06/22/2002 11:19:42 PM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1058 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
"States have the right to refuse those funds, don't they? "

It is an infringement of the rights of the states for the federal government to control any amount of education funding. That they currently do so and that the states can choose to "refuse" this funding doesn't make it less of an infringement.

1,074 posted on 06/22/2002 11:20:09 PM PDT by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1038 | View Replies]

To: Mo1; Amelia
That was one of President and Mrs. Bush's projects to encourage retired military to become school teachers. Like Amelia said, they usually make great teachers.

I agree it is a great way to start taking back the schools!
1,075 posted on 06/22/2002 11:20:45 PM PDT by PhiKapMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1055 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Sham
That they currently do so and that the states can choose to "refuse" this funding doesn't make it less of an infringement.

Circular logic.

1,076 posted on 06/22/2002 11:22:10 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1074 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
He has the best aides and office staff also. I called his office after the Jeffords debacle to complain which is when I found out that his PAC had donated $10,000 to
the Jeffords campaign AFTER Jeffords came around looking for support. I thought I was mad, but the woman I talked to was madder than I was!

Tell me this was Lott and not Nichols, pleeeeeeeease!

Same was true of impeachment. I still have his letter explaining how Democrat Senators and some Republicans would not even go look at the evidence and had no
intention of voting to remove Clinton so they ignored evidence and the votes were NEVER going to be there to remove. They would not budge. NOTE: Not one
DemocRAT voted to remove!

Once again, was this Lott or Nichols?  Lott right?

Recently he has taken on ms. clinton twice quite publically even though the mainstream press chose to ignore it. If there were a lot more Senators like him and Sen
Inhofe, the United States Senate would be a lot better place.

Now, this is Nichols right?

1,077 posted on 06/22/2002 11:22:34 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1068 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
So you really didn't mean it. OK.

You really do need to brush up on your comprehension skills. Good night.

1,078 posted on 06/22/2002 11:22:45 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1072 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
There are a lot here laughing at you, R-Mam. -- While only you and maybe roscoe seem bemused with my wit, -- which is understandable, seeing you two bear the brunt of it.
1,079 posted on 06/22/2002 11:22:56 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1060 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Yes, you have been here long enough to know better. I agree.
1,080 posted on 06/22/2002 11:23:15 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1073 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,041-1,0601,061-1,0801,081-1,100 ... 2,241-2,242 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson