Posted on 01/21/2005 2:01:42 PM PST by ambrose
January 20, 2005, 2:15 p.m.
A Conservative President?
It amounted to a thoroughgoing exaltation of the state.
By Peter Robinson
Aw, gee. He's our guy, I like him, and his performance since 9/11 has proven brave, steadfast, and completely admirable. But this speech? It was well-written - in places actually beautiful - and well-delivered. (I dissent from Jonah Goldberg and others who fault Bush for his delivery on the ground that they're forgetting to multiply his score by the degree of difficulty. Just try standing outdoors, in freezing weather, using a sound system that echoes, and then delivering a speech to an audience that consists of more or less the entire planet. Denny Hastert couldn't even administer the oath of office to the vice president without misspeaking. Bush delivered his entire text without a flaw.) But the speech was in almost no way that of a conservative. To the contrary. It amounted to a thoroughgoing exaltation of the state.
Bush has just announced that we must remake the entire third world in order to feel safe in our own homes, and he has done so without sounding a single note of reluctance or hesitation. This overturns the nation's fundamental stance toward foreign policy since its inception. Washington warned of "foreign entanglements." The second President Adams asserted that "we go not abroad in search of monsters to destroy." During the Cold War, even Republican presidents made it clear that we played our large role upon the world stage only to defend ourselves and our allies, seeking to changed the world by our example rather than by force. Maybe I'm misreading Bush - I'm writing this based on my notes, and without having had time to study the text - but sheesh.
On domestic policy, a "broader definition of liberty?" Citing as useful precedents the Homestead Act, the Social Security Act, and the G. I. Bill? Compare what Bush said today with the inaugural address of Lyndon Baines Johnson and the first inaugural address of Ronald Reagan and you'll find that Bush sounds much, much more like LBJ. He as much as announced that from now on the GOP will be a party of big government. I can only hope that Chris Cox, Dana Rohrabacher, and other Republican members of Congress standing on the platform behind the president today were thinking to themselves, "Not so fast, buster." Bush may yet win critical conservative victories in this second term - notably by managing to enact private retirement accounts. But his "broader definition of liberty" makes me mighty nervous.
Tell me I'm wrong. Please.
Somehow I missed that.
"A Conservative President?"
NOPE!
He ain't wrong.
And this president is like no conservative I know.
I'm dearly hoping you are (wrong). We happen to be operating under a myriad of labels all claiming Conservativehood. Is Bush suggesting anything different from what MacArthur would have pursued if Truman hadn't reigned him in? Is Bush any less proud (and willing to demonstrate that pride) than TR? Any less determined to appoint conservative judges or any less specific in his identification of evil than Reagan? Any less adamant in his pursuit of free enterprise (the ownership society) and states' rights than Goldwater? And which of these big-C icons has suffered comparable attacks on his religious beliefs and rhetoric? How many hallmarks of Conservatism must one speech highlight?
I really don't understand the current "conservative" misgivings about this utterly logical, noble defense of liberty--from ambrose or from Peggy Noonan. What is the fear here?
My opinion on the matter is Bush is far closer to LBJ than reagan in terms of how he govrens and his core beliefs. Of course, many Neo-Cons started out as Anti Communist LBJ style Democrats.
I didn't hear that at all. What I got out of his speech is that people everywhere should be in charge of their own destiny, not the state. If that's not Conservative, I don't know what is.
No, the conservative defination would be to acknowlege that nations and societies can choose their own destiny, and to remain within the framework of the US constituion in terms of foreign and domestic policy.
By the 50s and 60s, Irving Kristol became an ardent Anti Communist. Too many of the plans, both foreign and domestic, from the Bush admin remind me of the LBJ admin in terms of being fore big govrenment and big spending. Too over reaching.
" By the 50s and 60s, Irving Kristol became an ardent Anti Communist"
Maybe his friends in the movement told him "Irv, pretend to be anti-communist and see if you can undermine their society and culture".
What exactly does it mean to be a Conservative? First of all, I can tell you all what it does NOT mean:
To passively wait behind sealed borders waiting for the enemy to build up enough strength to make their assaults catastrophic.
To irresponsibly rein in spending in a time of unprecedented national crisis, when millions of Muslims around the globe are chanting for our deaths and actively seeking means to achieve this goal.
To be willing to sing the praises of catchwords such as liberty and freedom without be willing to do the hard work of destroying hostile theocratic totalitarian states by exposing their dark underbellies to the light of the will of the people.
To build up the greatest military force the world has ever seen without having the will to employ it to break the back of these fascist regimes in their own backyards, so that our children don't have to fight them in THEIR backyards.
What Conservatism DOES mean is just that, to "conserve". It means to preserve that which is worth preserving, to protect that which is viewed as irreplaceable, NO MATTER WHAT THE COST. Fiscal conservatism is NOT a creed to spend the least amount of money; it IS a creed to not spend money IRRESPONSIBLY. In a time of crisis, we must step up to the plate and be willing to pay whatever price is necessary [in blood or in treasure] to preserve or freedom and liberty.
You're WRONG Peter Robinson!
A real conservative scares the pants off of you. You've become a neocon and didn't know it.
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.