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.

[Registered]

How you and that Texasforever guy can reside in the same State sure amazes me....he must be a transplant ;-)

[Sir Gawain]

What? What did I do?

[Texasforever]

Before ya go. read my last post to you.

[deport]

What ever floats your boat.....

[Howlin]

You think I want Elizabeth Dole? Hmm.....no way. But when I don't get my way, I'm not going to call people who support her facist or socialist.

[Registered]

...can I expect at least Mike Rogers or Valde Garcia?(two solid conservative reps)

Only if they pass a Socialized medicine litmus test ;[)

[Lazamataz]

Read it. Don't have time to respond now.

[RAT Patrol]

I am fresh out of slack.

[Howlin]

Fine by me.

[Twodees]

Ed, at the national level, I doubt that the GOP even has a conservative agenda. I haven't seen any sign of one since around '97.

[Howlin]

You've been called a child molseter? Well, you win.

[Registered]

I'm sure the Admin Moderator will provide the reasons why one goes and the other stays just as soon as they get back from their break...hehehe.

[Torie]

I had a discussion with my brother about guns. I told him I didn't think gun restrictions would do much good regarding keeping guns out of the hands or criminals or nuts. If they want them, they wil get them. That's obvious. I told him I thought the restricitons were a waste of time. I also don't believe the slope to confiscation is that slippery. It won't happen, unless public opinion changes a lot. It also won't happen given the new evidence that an armed society is a polite society. But I think there is merit to waiting periods. It gives a chap in hot blood a chance to cool off.

But Laz is right. This issue is not a big one for me, one way or another. There - I said it.

[Sir Gawain]

Not me. I was referring to the libertarians on here getting called such. I just get called a child. lol

[desertcry]

Right on, Sinkspur. The "FOOLISH" are what got clinton elected twice. Patience is indeed golden, particularly in politics.

[EternalVigilance]

Raise a glass for us, Laz!...and say hello to your far better half! ;-)

[Torie]

Hey, btw the way, regarding Liddy, let me know if you notice a real person ever peaking out from under that facade of hers. I know there is something real there somewhere, deep down inside.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Do you see me as one of those, Howling, If so I am very disappointed-I owe politicians nothing-I owe parties nothing-they owe me and you the fullfillment of every promise they made that bought them our vote. We hold the Lien-and all their colleteral are belong to us.

[Howlin]

I find it hard to get all worked up by your post. After all, I have no response to someone who refers to other posters as dingleberries.

[185JHP]

Excellence in posting. Truth per word index very high.