Posted on 10/20/2005 9:56:38 PM PDT by quidnunc
The bile accumulating on the right toward the White House has reached China Syndrome proportions and is starting to melt through the floor.
Suddenly, conservatives are starting to question whether George W. Bush is even a one of them at all. One of my heroes, Robert Bork, recently wrote in The Wall Street Journal that "George W. Bush has not governed as a conservative. This George Bush, like his father, is showing himself to be indifferent, if not actively hostile, to conservative values." Conservative columnist Bruce Bartlett opines: "The truth that is now dawning on many movement conservatives is that George W. Bush is not one of them and never has been." Even at National Review Online — where I hang my hat most of the time — several of our contributors have echoed these concerns.
I think this goes too far. Two factors contribute to this misdiagnosis: confusion and disappointment.
Let's start with confusion. Contrary to most stereotypes, conservatism is a much less dogmatic ideology than modern liberalism. The reason liberals don't seem dogmatic and conservatives do is that liberals have settled their dogma, so it has become invisible to them. No liberal disputes in a serious philosophical way that the government should do good things where it can and when it can. Their debates aren't about ideology, they're about tactics. Indeed, the chief disagreement between leftists and liberals over the role of the state is almost entirely pragmatic. Moderate liberals think it's not practical — either economically or politically — to push for a dramatic expansion of the role of the state. Leftists think it would be a good idea politically and, despite all the evidence to the contrary, think it would work economically.
Within conservatism, however, there are enormous philosophical arguments about the proper role of the state. This debate isn't merely between libertarians and social conservatives. It's also between conservatives who are "anti-left" versus those who are "anti-state." Neoconservatives, for example, are famously comfortable with an energetic, interventionist government as long as that government isn't run by secular, atheistic radicals and socialists (I exaggerate a little for the sake of clarity).
-snip-
Yeah, and Hillary's hair is growing.
I mean, come on. Imagine yourself before the world answering the same questions.
Yeah, and Hillary's hair is growing.
I mean, come on. Imagine yourself before the world answering the same questions.
Dude, you ain't kidding. What the heck is going on there?
Ramius wrote: "But the GOP still governs as if they are the minority party."
That's really not surprising considering incumbents almost always get re-elected. What percentage of our representatives and senators served for years in a Democrat-controlled Congress? Perhaps they don't know how to lead.
"2. There is not the overwhelming anti-immigrant sentiment among Americans"
LOL.
Doing an ostrich impersonation now?
LOL
a.) Most of them
b.) Exactly.
:-)
To tell the truth, moreover, I don't see the Federal courts or the Federal government in general as being a reliable bulwark of gun rights---whoever is on SCOTUS. Protection of civil rights such as RKBA is properly the same bailiwick today as it was in 1791---that of the states. "States rights," properly conceived and stripped of the pejorative connotations it developed in the '60's is still the best guarantor of individual rights against a gargantuan Federal government. Individual RKBA must be put in every state constitution as a better safeguard of RKBA than the Second Amendment IMHO.
Another difference is that hillary has bigger balls!
"It's anti-Mexican sentiment, pure and simple!"
are you channeling bayourod now?
Yep, people want the borders enforced and illegal aliens of all nationalities deported because they're anti-mexican.
Even the americans of mexican heritage who share the same sentiments are anti-mexican!
It's like a disease!
But it looks like Santorum will lose in 2006.
In a word, No.
Hillary and her minions may be moonbats, but they are not stupid.
ALGore would have been progressively less controlable, and would likely not have been able to stave off the results of ruinous policy during Bill's presidency.
By not using something she had on Bush, the failed Clinton era policies coming to fruition could be blamed on Bush and the Republicans, from the economy to national security, to energy, and even 9/11, etc.
She did not count on the amount of sucess the Bush administration has had.
Kerry is the old school Massachusetts (read: Kennedy) liberal, and by Kerry running and losing, the Kennedy hegemony within the Democratic Party has been significantly reduced.
The Clinton machine came on board toward the end of the campaign, to 'help', which further ensconced their power.
Don't misunderestimate that woman, ever.
She has her eyes on the prize, and is fully attempting to orchestrate a situation where there will be an outcry for her.
After candidates who frankly appeared to be a parody of the presidential election process, she fully intends to be the saviour of the party, sharp mind, sharp teeth, and all.
Failing that, she will be just behind whomever is in front, pulling the strings of power as much as she can.
All that would be for naught, however, if the SCOTUS is composed of judges who will overturn her agenda on a Constitutional basis. My bet is that she has been holding her trump cards back in hopes of being able to influence the decisions as to who is nominated to the court.
Meirs lack of track record is about the only way to deflect this offense, even Republicans are objecting, and that makes it harder to lean on Bush over Meiers.
Either this is a grand finesse, or other misdeeds are afoot.
The files may be on select members of the administration as well, and not W, but with the effect of the dems creating another 'Nixon/Watergate' ambiance to compliment their dogged pursuit of the Vietnam in Iraq analogy.
We may not agree with her, may even despise her, but never forget that she is dangerous.
I think the Miers haters, the immigration one-noters, and the anti-spenders have screwed us all. There is a lot that Bush does that I don't like but he is already president and when we attack him we lessen our chances of electing more Republicans in '06. As I've said before, scream bloody murder but do it quietly. Email, snail mail, phone calls, they work.
Yes, Rush is a loon.
He's a looin because he insults the intelligence of his audience.
He has alternately played up to the pro-Bush conservative and the anti-Bush conservatives.
If Bush is broiught doen, Rush will share in the blame.
222 posted on 10/20/2005 10:41:45 PM CDT by quidnunc
"when we attack him we lessen our chances of electing more Republicans in '06"
Correction:
What bush is doing is lessening the chances of electing mroe republicans in 06'.
People aren't complaing about what he's done because it's good for his health. They're complaining - get this - because of what HE has done!
perhaps "social" (anti left) vs. "fiscal" (anti state) conservatives might explain it better... social conservatives believing in an activist govt which supports the moral leanings of the right. fiscal conservatives believing that fiscal restraint starves the govt, and keeps it from increasing... (cue "somewhere over the rainbow"....)
BS.
Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.
A political movement doesn't amount to a hill of beans unless it can get electoral power.
And they say we're paranoid.
In many was the president has governed as a conservative. In some ways he has not.
The Miers nomination is a Big mistake. She would not be good for the court or the nation and we want to STOP IT.
Everyone wants to see their brand of conservatism succeed and become dogma for the movement.
Reagan conservatism was FIRST for many of us and therefore is dominant. This dominance was well earned. He was the one who shaped much of our thinking. We've been at it for 25 years (some of us much longer) and we will continue to promote those ideals. No one is stopping you from advocating your own.
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.