Conservatives, Cut Bush Slack

The Chicago Sun-Times ^ | June 22, 2002 | Thomas Roeser

[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.

[Cultural Jihad]

I have in the past tried every approach to the EOP's. I have tried serious debate, I have tried humor, I have tried reason. To no avail. I have given up because you and you ilk have no concept of the reality we face as a nation. I have decided that the best course is just to laugh at you and approach you with the ridicule you and your like minded allies so richly deserve. I am SICK of being told what a “true conservative” should be. I am SICK of being called a “BushBOT”, a “STATIST”, a “Jack booted thug”, A “hater of the constitution”. I am SICK a bunch of 3rd part whackos that have the unmitigated GALL to LECTURE we naive Republicans on what it takes to win and then to threaten us with losing their votes if we don’t “see the absolute TRUTH” they are oh so patiently trying to impart.

You speak for at least 90% of FreeRepublic, Tf.

[Roscoe]

Like I don't know how to interpret, "Check back in a year or two..."

That's easy. It means that he was caught inventing facts again and he wants you to table the matter.

[tpaine]

Whatever.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

You can speak for me anytime, Texasforever. I'm honored to be on the same page you are.

[EternalVigilance]

Thank you for your kind words, and for being of good will and a good spirit.

I think folks like you still are in the heavy majority around here, notwithstanding the smoke and noise produced by those who are not.

Regards,
EV

[unsycophant]

As someone who was on the receiving end of some of the "witty repartee" that you refer to, let me assure you that I did not find it to be witty. It was not funny. It was not clever. It was uncalled for, and it was disgusting.

The "unfavorable climate" on this thread was contributed to by many people, all as equally responsible.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Snappy. Snappy repartee. (I didn't watch your exchanges with the poster in question, so I can't really comment...if you were kind and respectful to someone who in turn insulted you, then you are right to be angry.)

[tpaine]

Maybe, --- 90% of the sickos. ---

But all of FR? -- You been with those jihadic cultists too long, bro. Hooka?

[Cultural Jihad]

Often a person will be so enslaved by their unruly passions that any barb directed at their chain becomes seen as a personal attack against them, and they lash out in kind. Someone says pornography should be banned, and someone else feels they've personally been kicked in the gut, fearful that their little gratifications will be taken away. Someone points out that moral-liberalism brings unneeded suffering and death, and someone else is reminded of their neice or nephew or brother or sister who suffered needlessly, and they have to lash back at the messenger against moral-cowardice.

[toenail]

Any reason you didn't quote the next sentence?

"Additionally, there should be demands that the government enforce the existing OSHA guidelines regarding blood-borne pathogens."

Listen, Roscoe. I love sparring with those with opposing views, dishonest or not. But I detest sparring with the lazy and deliberately uninformed.

[EternalVigilance]

Well said.

[cascademountaineer]

Woah...

Wisdom.

[tpaine]

It is easy. It was my 'wiseguy' type reply to her 'wisegal' type question. Big deal.

It isnt even a tempest in a teapot.

[Cultural Jihad]

I just mention it by way of observation, as I myself talk in generalities against mindsets and ideologies while those who for whatever reason choose to so closely misidentify with mindsets and ideologies often lash back with personal attacks.

[unsycophant]

I am not sure the Democrats are ruled by much ideology anymore. Maybe a few, but not many. Their reality is power, and they do whatever it takes to retain it, or acquire it, even if it means compromising on the ideas they have. And they don't play fair, which is something the GOP hasn't been great at dealing with effectively in past, but is getting much better, thanks in part to President Bush.

We all suffer the Democrats. The LP does not contribute to any suffering, as far as I'm concerned. They are interesting to debate and listen to, but the party can't seem to recruit enough active participants to do anything. As far as having any influence in politics or public agenda, they're irrelevant. It's a two-party system, and I don't see that changing soon.

See ya.

[Cultural Jihad]

Of course the LP can't elect a dog catcher, but don't so quickly dismiss its championed moral-liberalism underpinning which is rotting away our society. A nation of personally-corrupted citizens can expect little by way of securing a non-corrupt government.

[toenail]

Hey, CJ, haven't posted to you in a while.... I forgot once to mention to you that when I joined the LP, the Cato Institute sent me a complimentary pocket Constitution, which was nice. I just thought you'd like to know that they don't send out Zig-Zags and Trojans. Take it easy....

[Cultural Jihad]

I just thought you'd like to know that they don't send out Zig-Zags and Trojans. Take it easy....

Naw. The Democratic Greens Party of George Soros will see to the "free" Zig Zag/clean needle/Trojan distribution schemes.

[Pythagoras]

I voted for Dubya in the last election but I plan on voting third party in November and in '04. Just the other day Orrin Hatch on a roll call vote passed through in-state tuition for illegal aliens. It is utterly amazing the Bush Administration is so quick to criticize the INS when they are attempting to LEGALIZE millions of illegal alien criminals. The fact that Bush sold America down the Rio Grande just like Buchanan said he would made me see the light. Of course then there was the farm bill, campaign finance, kyoto, millions to African Aids, bureaucratic organizations like the Dept. of Homeland security, his total inaction of abortion and his hispanic supreme court affirmative action.

[Roscoe]

"Additionally, there should be demands that the government enforce the existing OSHA guidelines regarding blood-borne pathogens."

Again, from your own links: "Clinical Laboratory means a workplace where diagnostic or other screening procedures are performed on blood or other potentially infectious materials."

There in NO explicit inclusion of abortion clinics within the regulatory text linked. If it has been the settled practice of OSHA to exempt abortion clinic, a new regulatory standard or a change in the manner that the old rules were applied would necessitate publication of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and a public comment period. Any new regulations, or new applications of the same, created with a predetermined outcome and without changes in existing law would be subject to court challenge.

Pursuant to what law could a President order such a regulatory change to take place?

But I detest sparring with the lazy and deliberately uninformed.

Odd. You apparently don't mind being lazy and deliberately uninformed.