LOL
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.
The last "foaming-at-the-mouth liberal that was elected president was.....Who?
*Rolling my eyes*
And maybe it's because he sucked as a candidate.
What kind of conservative would select a lesbian Stalinist as his running mate and then allow her to drag him to kiss Al Sharpton's ring?
I have to say that I don't think that I would want anybody who let his advisers saddle him with this kind of advice to be president of any country that I was living in.
Do you dislike him because he "sucked as a candidate," or because of his beliefs?
Jim I know a lot of folks think I fold at the drop of a feather, but I don't see it that way. I simply cannot fathom Bush joining with Ted Kennedy on a $300 billion plus healthcare fiasco. I can't sign onto the medication package for Medicare. Both will break the bank. Both will contribute further to ruin what dismal healthcare that is left in this nation.
I can't sign on to a $40 billion increase in the DOE, a Department I don't just dislike, but despise. I can't sign on to legalizing illegal immigrants and leaving the borders open. Our Navy has 310 out of 600 ships left from Reagan in has been budgeted to drop further in upcoming years.
Look I could go on like this for a while. But there are things I like about Bush. He is an honest family man. I appreciate the fact that he is not schtooping the White House interns and anything else flying under the radar. But that isn't the same as being a true conservative.
Bush is still supporting the trade with China that sees our technology gifted to them. Our R&D is slipping away to them as well. These are critical matters that aren't even on his radar.
I know people think it's easy for us to carp. The fact is it's easy to become complacent and accept what we have for now, because it could be a lot worse. Folks, it could be a whole lot better, let me tell you.
LOL
I would disagree. It matters a great deal what the President thinks on the issue of life. Bill Clinton believed frevently in the right to butcher a baby, and vetoed PBA twice. Now of course a PBA ban would not really solve the problem of third trimester abortions, but it is a vital political move forward, and a vital social link in proclaiming one form of abortions wrong and illegal.
When I hear politicians say, "There's nothing I can do. We must change hearts before we change laws", I must admit that I think to myself, "There's someone who would rather not be bothered with the issue of life. Here is a politician who will not lift a finger to truly enact real reform."
Perhaps I misjudge some. I do not know. Bush has done a few things.
But if that's the standard, then John Ashcroft is continuing the cover up even now.
Don Myers wrote: Do you dislike him because he "sucked as a candidate," or because of his beliefs?
I dislike him because of what he almost did to Bush's chances in the election and because I have decided that he is an out-and-out fraud.
What is it?
hmmmm, is there a franchise for that?
Would you feel the same way about any third-party candidate?
They'd rather not have to defend their positions or face complaints of unconstitutionalism by the government -- yes, including the Executive Branch.
It's hard trying to defend the indefensible, and I guess they're feeling a bit tired these days. If they want to dis-associate, well, I say let 'em.
Tuor
Give me liberty or give me death.
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.