Skip to comments.Worrying About "W"
Posted on 04/26/2005 11:12:30 AM PDT by MikeEdwards
A lot of thoughtful conservatives are having serious second thoughts about George W. Bush. His failure to act upon core values of fiscal conservatism and sovereignty is a growing concern.
Donations to conservative organizations and think tanks are in sharp decline. A lot of conservatives have decided to stop giving financial support because they are losing faith in the ability of these groups to have any effect on administration policies.
Bush has an engaging personality, but hes not running for office anymore. He is already a very lame duck.
In concert with Republican party leaders in Congress, the White House has been unable to get its judicial appointments approved and the fight over John Boltons appointment as UN ambassador suggests the party lacks unity on Capitol Hill. Bolton has been confirmed four times for previous positions. Unless the GOP can unite to overcome the obstructionism of the Democrats, it bodes ill for the party.
If conservatives stay home for the 2006 elections, power can shift to the Democrats.
People are increasingly worried about the huge budget deficit created by a President and a Congress that have been on a spending binge. The national debt has increased by $2.16 billion every day since September 30, 2004. It is now a cliché that Bush has not vetoed a single spending bill while in office. New "entitlements" added to Medicare for prescriptions will add still more to the rising tide of national debt. It is not "if" the economy will reach a tipping point this accumulated debt cannot be paid, but when.
Compounding fears is the appearance of an increasingly shaky economy that includes rising inflation and major corporations like General Motors in trouble. Wall Street is experiencing early tremors that forecast a bear market. . . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
Yeppers, that's me!
Too bad they can't vote.
And a handful more.
I told him that we would be giving directly to the candidates we support from here on out, not to the party.
That's odd, especially right after a successful election season.
I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm not having second thoughts about voting for Bush. The deficit existed before he was re-elected and the alternative was much worse.
And a handful more.
I told him that we would be giving directly to the candidates we support from here on out, not to the party.
I voted for bush mainly because I could not stomach the liberalism of either kerry or gore.
That being said Bush neds to secure the borders, stop his out of control spending and get both deficits in control.
He better stop making the WOT his prime area and focus on jobs, healthcare etc.
Many Reagan democrats are going to leave the ship if he does not.
I make two political contributions each year. Ron Paul and the NRA.
Definition of Lame Duck:
person holding office after his or her replacement has been elected to the office, but before the current term has ended. In the American presidency, the period after election day in November and the swearing-in of the new President in January is known as the lame duck period
Since this seems to be a common definition of 'lame duck president', I do not understand why the press keeps referring to Bush as a 'lame duck'.
Yeah, let's let the Democrats run things. They always do a superb job.
Canada needs to get its own house in order.Maybe then I will listen to their opinion of Republicans.
Bush becomes a lame duck on November 4, 2008.
Quote: The deficit existed before he was re-elected and the alternative was much worse.
Yes both deficits were there when he started but if you look at he charts they have both skyrocketed under his pesidency.
With all due respect, Mr. Mehlman I feel I must be candid with you as a loyal Republican. At least the Democrats are showing some spine and doing what they do best. It is the Republicans that anger me and I am not alone. What exactly is Senator Frist waiting for? What did "we" win when we reached 55 Republican Senators? When are we going to start acting like we have a sizeable lead and force our mandate down their throats. Let them scream and complain-it's what they do.
I understand I am not a sizeable donor and am just a voice in the wilderness, but if you listen very carefully you will hear that I am not alone. Yes, I will still vote Republican straight down the line in every election. Yes, I will continue to donate a couple of hundred bucks. Yes, I will drive my Cuban in-laws to the voter booth so they can thumb there nose at Castro and vote Republican. But I do it with less enthusiasm. I can be taken for granted. I am not so sure that other voters can. Why would they come out in droves like they did in '04? when they were defending Dubya. They will not be as energized in '06. The libs will be. I know-I work in an office full of them.
Exactly. Which means he ain't a lame duck president now. But I continue to hear the press and the dems call Bush a lame duck president. The article for this thread is an example.
My monetary support has ended for the Republican Party until they demonstrate the desire and backbone to address fiscal irresponsibility - much of which is their own - and illegal immigration.
President Bush has been a powerful Commander-in-Chief and outstanding on foreign policy issues. He has, however, sold us out on fiscal and immigration issues. The cost of Medicare is now exponentially larger due to the prescription drug fiasco-in-the-making and the few people willing to do something about unchecked illegal immigration, he calls vigilantes.
Someday we will finally figure out that on "non-morality" domestic issues, the Dems and GOP are identical. If they agree on just a few more issues, we may have to change the GOP platform quite a bit to reflect reality.
Bush does what Congress does. If Congress passes it, he signs it. All we've got to do is make a more conservative Congress and we'll get our results.
It's Because whenever someone wants to do something about the borders, Liberals call "racism!"
So the Republican party is going to make us scream for border security. We have to SCREAM FOR IT!
Yes you're right, I remember reading it also, but I can't remember where.
As I recall, the article attributed the high numbers to grassroots.
I will continue to support the GOP because I fear far more the alternative.
Anyone remember "Let Reagan be Reagan" back in the 80's? Porous borders, deficit (social, not defense) spending, tax increases (TEFRA), amnesty for illegals, spongy response to Soviet moves in Poland, death of Marines and pullout from Beirut - all were issues back then.
Not saying the issues aren't serious now, and acknowledging that dems had control of congress during the 80's, but perspective is always helpful.
I'm just surprised that anything by Alan Caruba is allowed to stay up here.
You've got that right
"Yes both deficits were there when he started but if you look at he charts they have both skyrocketed under his pesidency." um i do believe you mean presidency
and although i agree up to a point we must remember that oh gee lets see ... THERE IS A WAR WE NEED TO FIGHT
gee that has nothing to do with increased spending
granted he has made some other increases i do not agree with but some slack should be given due to the war on terror
Canada Free Press......
"THERE IS A WAR WE NEED TO FIGHT"
Really?, you'd think GWB would have the common sense or gonads or both, to secure our borders then.
"That being said Bush needs to secure the borders,"
Isn't it clear by now he's against that?
"stop his out of control spending and get both deficits in control."
He has always been for increased deficits and spending.
"He better stop making the WOT his prime area"
It's the only area he's got good poll numbers on.
"and focus on jobs,"
He thinks we need massive amounts of illegal aliens.
He's for increasing the profits of drug companies, given his ban on "Canadian" drugs, and we have a free trade treaty with Canada so "safety" is made the pretext to the ban. But it's a weak argument so the corporate interests that write his legislation won't make that mistake again. CAFTA, a supposed free-trade treaty has one explicit reservation: drugs.
Medicaid/are is a great problem but those who receive the money, HMO's, doctors, etc. give a lot in campaign contributions to have caps not imposed and to dodge regulations. The prescription drug benefit plan was written by the industry to contain provisions that competitive bulk discounts could not be sought by the government.
It's a lost case. Focus on your representatives in 2006.
Everyone acts like Reagan was a fierce proponent of strict immigration laws. I don't know how old you are but do you recall Reagan's amnesty for illegals? Reagan democrats are going nowhere.
IIRC, the same thing was said of Reagan. I know for a fact it was said of him while he was Gov. of Calif. It was said, however, only by his opponents.
Seal the borders
Enforce our immigration laws (= deport every single illegal alien)
pass the PRESIDENT's energy legislation
and act like the RNC is in the majority we gave them last election
That's me. I've only donated twice in my life and that was to Pres. Bush in 2004. What you wrote pretty much sizes up what I told an RNC solicitor yesterday on the phone. He told me what I told him they are hearing all the time from other Republicans.
I was very excited that President Bush won in November and that the Senate increased their seats but they have been a huge letdown since. They have let the Dems dictate the show ever since.
The Republicans (especially the ones in the senate) are a bunch of eunuchs. I can't get excited or enthused about any of them really. They need to quit with the "my good friend across the aisle, Senator so and so" crap. We have no friends across the aisle. 99% of them are ruthless cut throat bastards and their policies are going to completely destroy this country. All I've seen from the Republicans is rolling over. Why do I need to send more money so they can do more of that? Unless someone gets some testosterone injections or some unknown wonderful, charismatic, truly conservative Republican comes out of the woodwork, 2006 and 2008 aren't going to be good years.
Tht's exactly the response I've been giving for several years to the RINO Party here in CA.
Donations to conservative organizations and think tanks are in sharp decline.
It's called the Not.One.Dime campaign.
To hell with Frist, to hell with Thune, and to hell with the GOP if they wait until the session is half-over before finding their spine or other significant parts of their anatomy. The GOP campaigned on judicial nominations as the second-highest priority for the Senate, and the electorate rewarded them with a healthy gain of four seats, remarkable for an election in which the incumbent president won by a tight margin. After spending a record amount of money on supporting Republican candidates, the electorate has sat back and watched as the Democrats, led by Harry Reid, have uncorked one lunatic manuever after another: challenging Ohio's slate of electors, holding up Condoleezza Rice's nomination while people like Mark Dayton outright call her a liar, and attempting to extort the White House into giving up its Constitutional assignment of nominating the judges the President sees fit for Senate approval.
What has this bunch of Republican milquetoasts done? Nothing.
Why? Apparently, they've changed their priorities since the election. No longer are judicial nominations the leading priority. In fact, they've done everything they can to backpedal from the frightening spectre of Harry Reid, for Pete's sake. Now they claim that they want to pass as much legislation as they can before the vote on nominations comes up ... meaning that the judges are actually the lowest priority for Frist and his band of merry cowards.
News flash: if we can't reverse the generations-long trend of increasing judicial activism, the act of passing legislation will eventually be rendered meaningless. The judges, as we have seen, will simply continue to legislate from the bench, ignoring Congress and the Executive and transforming us from a representative democracy to a secular mullahcracy, where lifetime appointments in black robes make all the decisions for us.
That's what the Republicans warned about when they campaigned in 2002 and 2004. Now it's time to step up and do something about it -- but despite their greater numbers and a clear signal from the electorate that rejects obstructionists (see Tom Daschle's enforced retirement), the GOP suddenly quails at the thought of taking action.
I have been a loyal member of the GOP since I cast my first vote. I have worked campaigns and championed candidates well before I ever posted anything on my blog at CQ. However, with the defection of John McCain and the lack of any real response from party leadership on the issue, I have to take a stand and demand either action or accountability -- and this is the time to do it.
Not. One. Dime. The next time Ken Mehlman sends you a request for money, that's the message he needs to get back. We ponied up in 2004, and in 2002, and in 2000. The GOP not only has not delivered, its current leadership won't even try. Frist and Rick Santorum claim they don't have the votes. Balderdash -- they don't have the leadership to get the votes. I'm not going to fund or support people who won't try to win, especially when the issue is so important.
Not. One. Dime. We're not in an election year, so this makes it easy for the Republicans to get this message to party leaders. No balls, no Blue Chips, boys. I don't mean just for the Senate, either. I mean for the entire Republican party. Feeding a fever may be good medicine, but feeding a failure only makes it last longer. Perhaps hunger will work where courage has so obviously failed.
Not. One. Dime. And when a vote does come, those Republicans who wind up supporting the minority's extortion over the majority in defiance of the Constitution will never see another dime from me -- but their opponents will, at every level of contest. Honestly, with Republicans like these in the Senate, we may as well have Democrats.
Not. One. Dime. If Bill Frist can't lead the GOP, then let's get rid of him now and find someone with the stomach for it. As long as he dithers, he'll never see a dime out of me for any election. Kay Bailey Hutchinson would have more guts and could pull the troops in line better; maybe we should give her a try as Majority Leader for a while.
It's time to send a real message to the Republicans about their priorities and their lack of leadership. This fight has been brewing for months, and it should have already been resolved by now. If they can't hack it, then we will find -- and fund -- the leaders who can.
The thing the authors don't understand that this is a temporary phenomenon - it will end just as soon as the Senate GOP leadership gets off the pot and confirms Bush's nominees.
Things are so backwards these days, that I am relying on the MSM to educate the general population to the perils of ILLEGAL immigration.
I don't know what will become of this country in three years? Bush has let me down.
The Republican leadership has managed to alienate both of its wings - a remarkable feat considering the majorities they won across the board a couple of months ago.
On this thread so far I've seen conservatives angry about immigration, and conservatives angry about spending policies. These issues are important, but they were never the reason my wing voted for the Republicans for all these 30 years.
Pro-lifers have been unified on just one thing: protecting life. We understood long ago that this meant getting Republican majorities to change the composition of the courts, and for pro-life judges to reverse Roe v. Wade.
That's always been the strategy, and come last November, we were crowned with success.
And that very DAY, Arlen Specter - new head of the Senate Judiciary Committee - stood up and warned the President not to press a "radical" slate of judges who would overturn Roe.
The Republican Party ignored the howls of pro-lifers.
So the pro-lifers took a "wait and see" attitude when Specter was installed.
Well, in just the past three weeks we saw the Republican party fail spectacularly and catastrophically on life issues. First there was the Terri Schiavo debacle, in which the Bush boys themselves and Congress and the Republican-controlled courts (Greer: Republican; Justice Kennedy: Republican) all washed their hands of the matter and killed her. And then Frist waffled and thus far has failed to pass the nuclear option, despite there being 55 Senators.
Pro-lifers are not very calculating souls. Most are devout Christians and not very political. They're not going to change parties. What they will do is stay home. And with them gone, the Republican majority will collapse.
At this point, all the Republicans can do is pass the nuclear option. That would stanch the bleeding. They have lost trust, but not all of it. If they don't, they are doomed in 2006 and for a long time thereafter. If the pro-lifers leave, many of them will turn back to their private lives and faith and not enter worldly politics again.
Republicans are blowing it, and it starts with the failure of both Bushes in the Schiavo case. They showed weakness, and became lame ducks the instant they did.
It's too bad.
But it is what it is.
I'm more worried about him holding hands with the sheik of Araby!
Gee, the least you thoughtful conservatives could have done was let me know we were having second thoughts. I've missed the wishy washy conservative moderate train I guess.
I have NO second thoughts about the President. The Majority of Conservatives do not have second thoughts about the President. The majority voted FOR him, the Majority are grateful it is he in that office. Everyone knew where he stood on all issues, we knew there were be periods we agreed and periods we disagreed. That is life. Want soemone you agree with 100%, run for office.
Some guy from the "National Anxiety Center" writes a piece on conservatives "abandoning" the GOP in a Canuck newspaper, and some people fall all over themselves agreeing with the article based on no evidence at all except an (obviously) biased "journalist's" statements, and their own pseudo-empirical evidence. You should be working for "60 Minutes". This story is of a piece with the "Air America is succeeding...No, it's not...Yes it is..." stories.
As has mine. If the GOP doesn't grow a pair, and start acting like the majority it is, then they WILL be turned out of office. Not because Republican voters will turn Socialist/Traitor, but we will just STAY HOME.
I know that House and Senate staffers post and lurk here, as well as a few office holders, and the REpublicans had best terminate their cranial-rectal inversions (look it up), and START FIGHTING or they WILL LOSE IN 2006!
See my #26.
Laz, you're no spring chicken, so you probably remember Reagan before he became Ronaldus Maximus.
Not to take away from your non-opus opus, or to diminish the importance of the points you make, but it helps to maintain some perspective. And, yes, we still have to hold their feet to the fire.
As a conservative Reagan Democrat, I would consider someone like Richardson of New Mexico in `08. He just made a tough decision re illegal alien control and that's a lot more than the current administration has done ("vigilantes").
First, take someone/thing for granted; next, say 'goodbye.'
Ironic, isn't it--reformed Democrats taking the Republican party to task for being too "liberal"?
But for now there are way too many Clintons, Gores and other lefty loonies over there for me. And Bush has only had four months, so like Horton the elephant, to Dubya I'm loyal 100%.
But as Zell Miller put it, I didn't leave that party--it left me.
Yep, that describes me. As I responded to Ken Mehlman's latest solitication:
I can't believe you sent this while I'm reading that Stoneless Frist is negiotating with the DemocRATS. Hypocrite? Talk to Frist.
Are we the majority or not?
Mitch McConnell said Sunday we have the votes.
VP Cheney has said he'll gladly break a tie.
What more do we need? Why can't we "git-er-done?"
We need to get a pair, grow up and like the MAJORITY we are! I guarantee you if the situation were reversed the DemocRATS would be beating us up so bad our mothers wouldn't recognize us. I truly dislike the DemocRATS and all they stand for. But they got STONES!
PS - 1. Judges
3. Criminal aliens
4. Social Security
Four issues that MUST be resolved to our benefit. If not, 2006 and 2008 are gonna be total disasters for us.
Dubya's got one important thing going for him: he has been very successful at not being John Kerry.