Posted on 11/06/2003 7:45:29 PM PST by Dr.Syn
A Ron Paul Republican: "I Hate Bush!" November 6, 2003 (In response to an article I wrote about Rush Limbaugh and chronic pain, a “Ron Paul Republican” reader expressed his disgust with Limbaugh. I responded and asked a general question about those who disagree with the Republican mainstream, “...would they really rather have Hillary?” The reader’s response to this was so sincere and well expressed that I decided to write him a response in the form of a long overdue statement to the “Bush Bashing” conservative community. Below are the edited reader response and my reply. For an unedited version of the entire stream you may reference this history.) Dear Dan: I have to vehemently disagree that Bush is any better than Hillary. We have lost much freedom under this regime not to mention Bush is the biggest spender since LBJ. I feel like the Republicans are rejecting Ron Paul as opposed to the other way around. The Republican platform has supposedly been for low taxes and less social welfare. Where is the beef? I have no regard for a party that blathers about personal responsibility and freedom yet has done nothing to help overtaxed Americans attain that goal. I have no respect for Bush as a leader. He has done nothing to make Social Security an honest system or at least grant an option out. Taxes are still oppressive; anyone who believes that an extra $50 a year in my pocket is stimulating the economy is a damn fool. I am tired of "compromise" and being compromised out of what is rightfully mine. We know what the Democrats are, but if the Republicans can't work to abolish the income tax and various other federal agencies, then their lives are pretty useless to someone like me. Sincerely, A Frustrated and Overtaxed American ---------------------------------------------- Dear Frustrated and Overtaxed American... Your reply was so well expressed; I have taken a few minutes from writing this week’s article to respond. I agree with almost all of what you say, although I do find myself freer under Bush than under Clinton. Conservatives had their First Amendment rights rewarded with IRS audits and trumped up Justice Dept. indictments for telling the truth under Clinton. It is easy to forget the facts of those eight years and that is why I am so happy that Olson, Coulter, Ingraham and others documented it so well in their books. Very little disagreement with your other points. Although.... Marginal tax rates have decreased under Bush while they increased under Clinton. Clinton spent like crazy, without a war, and got away with it because of record tax revenues. He should have paid down the debt in those “good” years and some people are under the false assumption that he did. Actually, Clinton was able to create a “current year” surplus from an “irrationally exuberant” economy and still keep spending (as opposed to decreasing taxes or retiring federal debt). Additionally, Greenspan “irrationally” reduced interest rates during the Lewinsky scandal which threw more gasoline on the economic fire and ultimately led to the grossly overvalued stock market meltdown. You may read “A Piece of Cake and a Bottle of Wine” for some facts on this. With a slow economy and 9-11, Bush had no choice except to spend. Had he tried to "balance the budget" in the face of liberal condemnation for any spending reductions, the Clinton recession would have become a New York Times certified Bush Depression. Although, abstractly, I would have favored a deep-V recession to re-establish economic equilibrium...politically it was not a realistic alternative after 9-11. While the liberals and elite media worship economic calamity...economic reality is beyond their grasp and honesty. You might wish to read “The Economy...America’s Forgotten Terror” for some discussion on this. Believe me, the status quo of American politics makes me sick. But...there are two realities which must be faced and dealt with. One is simple demographics. Anybody trying to radically alter course would never be elected. Between the population composition, enablers from the elite media and interest groups (i.e. non-profit “advocates” and organized labor); honest conservatives are morphed into Darth Vaders (or worse yet, “angry white males”). 50% of those who file income tax returns pay almost no individual income taxes...and then there are those who don’t even bother to file (but get to vote). Additionally, that bottom 50% is divvying up a $33 Billion Earned Income Credit pie. As if all this weren’t insult enough to the taxpayer...politicians are tripping over each other to buy votes with ever expanding entitlement programs. Whenever conservatives dare breathe the truth about this free buffet, they are labeled children haters and panderers to the “rich”. Bear in mind that the liberal version of “rich” starts at an annual income level of about $28,000. Not to be a bore, but you can reference “Even Liberals Know How to Loot” for some background. The second reality leads straight to the Judiciary. There’s a reason that the Senate Democrats are perverting the Judicial confirmation process...the liberal courts have enabled the welfare state by rewriting the Constitution for more than 80 years and the Democrats politically profit from income redistribution. Bush, or any conservative, has very little spending latitude or choice with mandated entitlements...they are court sanctioned. F.D.R. packed the bench starting 80 years ago and the trend has spread into the lower courts. Even the word “God” is becoming a violation of some idiot’s “rights”. Without a stable Republican majority in the Senate and a Republican president, there is zero hope of reversing this trend. Without a constructionist majority in the Court there is no hope of rectifying the madness. It has taken 80 years of corruption and sedition to create the mess facing America today. Realigning a judiciary takes long-term strategy, tactics and commitment. This is where the rubber meets the road. What was partially achievable under Reagan is almost impossible under Bush because of eight long Clinton years that distorted the expectations of entitlement and victim status in the U.S..."I am entitled to it because I 'Feel' I am" or "It is not my fault because I don't 'Feel' that I 'Should' be responsible". If Bush and the Republican Congress can: return the country to maintainable prosperity; solve the WMD conundrum; prevail in the war on terrorism and renew the “spark” of American pride, the road will be paved for longer-term corrections. Unfortunately, this is not an overnight genesis. Long-term corrective change requires long-term commitment to the mission of change. Ron Paul is a good American with some excellent ideas. But, he is not electable as President...not today. The conservative family is a diverse and inclusive cross-section of America, but its goals should be uniform. Unlike the liberals, conservatives do not revel in economic misery, institutionalized poverty, American deaths and the insignificance of the individual. The one area of challenge for conservatives is the ability to place dogma aside and rely on rational thought to achieve the common good. To reiterate...I am sympathetic to your frustrations. But a rigid adherence to dogmatic purity will only lead to disunity at a time that cries for unity. Our soldiers overseas need unity, the economy needs unity, the middleclass needs unity and President Bush needs unity. Contrary to my personal preferences, I am thinking about what is best for US. Sometimes one must have some faith and stay the course. This is a choice I have made...your choice is up to you. And, unlike a dogmatic purist, I will respect the choice you make even if I disagree with it. Once again, thanks much for your courteous and well expressed opinions. Dan Sargis Comments to inosome@dansargis.org
The fact is, that Howard Deans' on line supporters and a few other LIBERAL ( no, NOT DU ! ) sites are much MORE active/relevant, in politics, than FR is. Fr should/could be much more influential, but we aren't. Why ? For any number of reason, not the least of which is because it's so Balkanized and fragmented.
But, welcome to the gang. :-)
----------------------------
I'd be more impressed if he refused to present Ted Kennedy with the national service award given by the kooks running his library, and booted those kooks out the back door. That, of course, is beyond his capacity for courage and indignation. That's why I despise the Bushs.
In other words, you want a Clinton-type president.
No class, no culture, no respect for the office.
How telling...
Unfortunately, membership lists don't take into account the multiple user names ( which isn't really allowed, but which IS the norm for quite a number here ), the " dead " accounts, nor even the disruptors. There is NO way, none at all, to figure out how many non-member lurkers there are either. Then, there are the fringers , and those who are all mouth ( fingers pounding away at a keyboard ), who never have and will never do anything whatsoever, to further GOP wins.
Please DO take advantage of FR's archieves and bone up on our history. :-)
---------------------
How does your conclusion in the second sentence follow from the first? If you believe there is a connection, you could benefit from a few years of psychoanalysis --maybe. Indications are there is nothing in your head to analyze.
Sounds like this guy should've finished high school and got a better wage.
It's all or nothing losers like Pat Buchanan who will never get elected to any public office because of the very same attitude you and others like you have. If you think there is a politician out there that will answer your every need, I have a bridge to sell you. What you are.. is a malcontent who wouldn't be happy if God himself came down from the heavens and took his marching orders from you alone. You Sir are one miserable human being who will never be satisfied with anything.
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.