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.

[MJY1288]

I guess this thread has good reason to make people get touchy, but wasn't trying to imply anything, And I'm sure as hell aint going to apologize for the truth.

[Sabertooth]

Your state is the major driver towards socialism. Look at your Delegation and and electoral votes.

Instead of complaining about Bush, clean up your own house.

Thus far, President Bush has proven to be a major impediment to cleaning up our house.

Ever wonder what happened to the GOP lock on California that ended with Clinton in 1992? Prior to that, only LBJ had been able to take CA for the Dems since 1950.

The key is San Diego and Orange County. There used to be more than enough Republicans there to offset Leftist majorites in Los Angeles and the Bay Area... until the demographic tidal wave of Illegal Aliens. Illegals provide a huge opportunites for voter fraud and demogoguery by the Left. Why do you think Democrats scream bloody murder if we try to get rid of bilingual ballots and laws against requiring valid ID to register or vote? And they do it with the anti-Illegal = anti-immigrant = racist smear. How do you think Loretta Sanchez beat Bob Dornan?

And who do you think aided the Democrats? California tried to clean up its house in 1994, and was thwarted not only by the courts, but by the betrayal of a number of prominent Republicans who lent their imprimatur to the lies of the Left. Jack Kemp and Bill Bennett were foremost among them. But another Republican tossed in his two cents against us during the '94 battle over Proposition #187, even as he was making his first bid for the Texas state house: George W. Bush.

The President is sometimes part of the problem, and I will speak freely when he is, your disturbing attempts to stifle opposition notwithstanding.

[Reagan Man]

So the famous "blue/red" map from the 2000 election, shows liberal Democrats live in urban areas, while conservative Republicans live in the rural/suburban areas. BIG DEAL! This trend is something demographic experts have known and reported about since the 1960`s. I respect Walter Williams as an economist, but his political stances on many issues is on the political fringe. Joe Sobran has evolved into a rightwing fanatic and Thomas Dilorenzo is a wild eyed extremist who enjoys producing distortions and lies about President Lincoln. When it comes to this issue of seccession, the Free State Project verges on wacko extremism. You people don't live in the real world.

I consider myself a pragmatic, traditional, law and order conservative and a proud Republican to boot. These are political positions I take because I love America and believe her best days lie in front of her. I haven't seen anything in my lifetime or in recent years that would lead me to believe the constitutional republic the Founding Fathers created, is about to fall apart. The main problems facing conservative America, are related to 70 years of creeping liberal policy that has produced excessive taxation and wealth transfers, which have allowed liberal law makers to build a selected social welfare state.

Politics is a slow process and the only way to turn things around, is to elect more and more conservative candidates to public office. That means employing a strategy of practical policy based on political incrementalism, negotiation and compromise. This will improve our chances to advance the most conservative agenda possible. It also means that if conservative Republicans want to get elected, they must appeal to independents and dissatisfied Democrats.

One enemy of the conservative movement is liberal Democrats who want to force America into a European type, social welfare state. Another enemy of conservatism are the fringe extremists, who would support and vote for third party candidates, or stay home on election day, in order to punish Republicans and teach them a lesson. What absurd and irrational thinking that is. It doesn't seem to matter, to these extremists, that such a startegy, would only lead to electing liberal Democrat's to office. You know, those people whose agenda we on the rightwing oppose and we're suppose to be defeating at the polls.

One thing that you and your political ilk can't seem to comprehend, is that America will never take a political course that sends it down a path of fringe extremism. The political gridlock we've experienced for the last 20 years, will only be solved by taking a solid and realistic, mainstream conservative approach. If you want to see America take an immediate hard right turn, that calls for a revolution and that is something the vast majority of Americans, like 99% of us, would never support.

[Lazamataz]

Getting people out of public housing and into a program where they buy their own homes is a "huge socialist housing program?"

Yes, when you give people down payments outright. That is wealth-redistribution. You have taken my money and given it to another person, in a classic Communist move.

Why can't those people stay in the projects where they belong, eh, Laz?

You are implying that I am a racist or classist now. You are indeed a hypocritical piece of trash. This is a perfect example of the Politics of Absolutism: If you oppose any of Bush's policies, you are a traitor. If you question government giveaways, you are a racist or classist. And so on.

The purpose of the Politics of Absolutism is to silence the opposition. I will not be silenced, and I will point out any use of this intellectually-dishonest rhetorical cudgel whenever I see it.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

And I'm sure as hell aint going to apologize for the truth.

You shouldn't. Nothing wrong with pointing out the plain truth.

[Roscoe]

You seem to have turned around on this topic.

False. What else is new?

Apparently, using the "Politics of Absolutism is to silence the opposition" is only a problem for you when someone else is using it.

You are an unabashed hypocrite.

[Roscoe]

Yes, when you give people down payments outright. That is wealth-redistribution. You have taken my money and given it to another person, in a classic Communist move.

And once again, the "Politics of Absolutism is to silence the opposition" shows its hypocritical face.

[Lazamataz]

You are an unabashed hypocrite.

This, from a man who implies I am a racist or classist because I oppose socialist redistribution plans??? LOL!!!

There's little point in dealing with an ignorant ahole such as yourself. Maybe I'll come back and poke you with a stick for amusement, later, but right now I've stuff to do.

[toenail]

This'll be the end of my comments on this post. There is no "interpretation" to, for instance, regulations against reusing unsterilized instruments between medical procedures. There is, however, a long history of unenforcement of these regulations when they concern abortion clinics, since abortion clinics are staffed and run by medical washouts whose costs would curtail their population control activities if they had to abide (in reality) with the same regulations that reputable medical facilities do. There is nothing written that precludes them from enforcement; there is only the wink-wink unenforcement and ensuing claptrap apologetics of those who want to give abortion clinics free reign.

[Lazamataz]

"Yes, when you give people down payments outright. That is wealth-redistribution. You have taken my money and given it to another person, in a classic Communist move."

And once again, the "Politics of Absolutism is to silence the opposition" shows its hypocritical face.

Bovine scatology. I noted that communism is the redistribution of wealth and observed that this housing program is also redistribution of wealth. A=B and B=C, ergo A=C.

I can't help it if simple logic intimidates you. Go get some education, it will no longer intimidate you any more.

[Sabertooth]

I guess this thread has good reason to make people get touchy, but wasn't trying to imply anything, And I'm sure as hell aint going to apologize for the truth.

From your #2045:

If you take my post wrong, blame yourself. There was nothing implied, just facts.

The only point of the facts you posted was the guilt-by-association fallacy the plain reading of your words clearly implied. If you didn't intend that, what was the purpose of your facts?

[Wordee]

Remember to say President Bush is not WRONG. President Bush is RIGHT. President Bush is ON our side. Just KEEP saying that and YOU will feel better. It really DOES help. And try PRAYING sometimes. It will BE good for you.

[MJY1288]

Laz, my goodness, You bring a whole new meaning to An@l Rententive

[Lazamataz]

Remember to say President Bush is not WRONG. President Bush is RIGHT. President Bush is ON our side. Just KEEP saying that and YOU will feel better. It really DOES help.

This is known as 'chanting', and deadens your mind to critical thinking. Cults employ this technique -- not implying, of course, you are behaving in a cultlike manner.

But your premise is incorrect. If Bush is wrong, he is no longer right.

[Lazamataz]

Laz, my goodness, You bring a whole new meaning to An@l Rententive

You mispelled capable of logic and possessing critical-thinking skills.

Hope that helps.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Now simply telling the truth on FR is bad. Lord help us.

[Lazamataz]

Now simply telling the truth on FR is bad. Lord help us.

Come on. You mean you are going to sit there with your teeth in your mouth and your face hanging out, and tell me you cannot see how these facts, presented as they are, are an implied smear -- a guilt-by-association???

Denial is very unbecoming.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Come on. You mean you are going to sit there with your teeth in your mouth and your face hanging out, and tell me you cannot see how these facts, presented as they are, are an implied smear -- a guilt-by-association???

My teeth are indeed in my mouth (where else should they be?), but I don't know what you mean by "face hanging out". Sounds weird, though.

I am going to tell you that if the graphics are appearing at DU, they're appearing at DU. We can all draw our own conclusions from that, but I doubt that anyone has suddenly concluded that the creator of such things is a closet socialist.

If the Democrats are enjoying the graphics, well, that says something to me - but apparently you would like people not to hear about it. That says something, too.

[Sabertooth]

Now simply telling the truth on FR is bad. Lord help us.

A selective use of the facts is known as "card-stacking." It's a tool of propagandists. While the facts may not be in dispute, the conclusion led to by the preselection is not necessarily honest.

Here's an example...

Say a scientist is testing a theory. He conducts an experiment. Some of the results confirm his theory, but some deny it.

If the scientist publishes a paper using only the facts that confirm his theory, has he been honest? Can we believe his conclusion?

Why not, if he only presented "facts?"

[Wordee]

This is known as 'chanting', and deadens your mind to critical thinking. Cults employ this technique -- not implying, of course, you are behaving in a cultlike manner. But your premise is incorrect. If Bush is wrong, he is no longer right.

President Bush is not WRONG. President Bush is ON our side. You dont have to CHANT. You can say President Bush is not WRONG. President Bush is RIGHT. President Bush is ON our side. And THEN you can say President Bush is RIGHT. President Bush is ON our side. President Bush is not WRONG. And I am sorry to SAY that you should say this and if you want you can just THINK this instead. Sometimes I have seen OTHER people saying things over and over AGAIN. They do that NEAR the fountain at the court. I know that they SOUND like something is WRONG with them. Maybe YOU should just THINK these things. I dont CARE as long as you STAY on our side any you DONT go on the OTHER side any more. Okay. I am DONE with you for right now.