Skip to comments.Jeb Bush: “I used to be a conservative” (So what is he now?)
Posted on 02/24/2012 1:17:54 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Jeb Bush isn't sure where he fits in the panoply of Republican Party leaders anymore. During a Q&A session after a speech in Dallas yesterday, the former Florida governor confessed that he doesn’t know what to make of the direction the current GOP candidates have taken Republican rhetoric:
"I used to be a conservative and I watch these debates and I'm wondering, I don't think I've changed, but it's a little troubling sometimes when people are appealing to people's fears and emotion rather than trying to get them to look over the horizon for a broader perspective and that's kind of where we are" said the former Florida Governor. “I think it changes when we get to the general election. I hope.” …
Maybe Jeb is just perplexed he isn’t Republicans’ first choice for a White Knight to ride in and save the Republican Party at a brokered convention. Or maybe he genuinely thinks negativity has subsumed the positive message Republicans have to offer:
The younger brother of former president George W. Bush also weighed in on the debate Republicans and Democrats are having over the national economy.
“If you want to narrow the income gap, there are two ways to do it. One, you punish people that are successful and try to narrow it that way and that’s the president’s approach. Or you equip people that aspire for a better life to give them the tools and then you don’t try to manage that, you allow them to pursue those dreams as they see fit. That to me is the better approach and it requires a celebration of success.”
Bush both misses and has a point.
First, the point he misses: The current GOP candidates — for all of the flaws they have in their pasts — consistently deliver conservative rhetoric. Their talk is tough on everything from entitlement reform to tax reform to immigration reform. They’re all anchored in the idea that rights are inalienable, unable to be granted nor revoked by government. They primarily respect the moral order, the idea that decisions have consequences and that individuals should have to take responsibility for the decisions they make. In many instances, their tone has been a triumph of conservatism, a signal that the candidates recognize that GOP voters want a conservative nominee. Sometimes, I think we don’t give the candidates enough credit for this truth.
Next, the point he makes: The candidates have frequently proved themselves to be poor politicians, succumbing to the temptations pitched to them by debate moderators and MSM interviewers. Journalists and observers alike are fascinated and interested in the horserace; they want to hear the candidates attack each other and pick apart each other’s past records. The candidates could certainly be better at not taking the bait and at pivoting from pointed-but-irrelevant questions to the broad, positive themes of conservatism.
“...but it’s a little troubling sometimes when people are appealing to people’s fears and emotion rather than trying to get them to look over the horizon for a broader perspective and that’s kind...”
Ah, significant bull-Obama alert, significant bull-Obama alert.
Note that there is absolutely no real information in the above extract. Typical libstuff...all plastic, no metal.
Then again, Bush is a RINO...just as is RINOmney, RINOewt, McRINO and Bob DoRIno.
I guess Jeb doesn’t understand that the left is practicing political warfare for keeps. He seems to be under the impression that the left wants the same thing we do, just has a different way to get there.
If so, he is dead wrong.
Jeb Bush was never a conservative. Look at the history of the Bush family. They have always been establishment. Sorry to all the fans of the Bushes. Not trying to start a fight.
A brain-dead RINO?
But was Jebby a “Severe Conservative”?
Proof positive that the GOP establishment believes that the “age of Reagan” is over.
The entire Bush family suffers from ‘Blue Blood Guilt’ psychosis constantly trying to sound apologetic. “Kinder Gentler Nation”, “Compassionate Conservatism”, “Leave No Child Behind”.
Let me tell you about these Bushes.
They are less about being ‘conservativism’, than they are about POWER and WEALTH within a political Party that provides those political cards and bennies! They use the “conservatism” card to get membership in the political party club.
Spit it out, Jeb. It’s all about amnesty, is it not?
Well, he certainly isn't a Newt.
This video of Barbara and George HW Bush always makes steam come out of my ears:
No fight here - agree 100% - A-1 pandering prick that man is. He would love nothing better than to be drafted and not have to waste his own money. Where’s that picture posted on FR of him and DaddyGeorge sitting with our PINO in the Oval Office with big grins...blech...
I used to be a “conservative” until I realized that conservatives seem to want to seize government just like liberals do. The difference being what they want to use government for. Thanks to von Mises, Rothbard and others, I now understand that big government threatens everybody’s liberty.
Everyone has heard of the Laffer Curve. Our country was founded on the basis that we need government so we can “enjoy the blessings of liberty”. However, above the amount of government needed to repel anarchy, the bigger the government, the less liberty that anyone can have, even if only because they are forced to work to pay for it in taxation.
So, just like there is a Laffer Curve for economic issues, there is a Liberty Curve: the more government we have, the less liberty we have, no matter how much we may cheer the way the current regime uses government in ways we like. This is because if we give anyone the legal power to expand government, sooner or later, government will be expanded at our own expense.
Our goal should maximize liberty, no maximize government, which the current crowd in Washington in both parties seems hell-bent on doing.
I used to be a Conservative Jeb says. What is he now, the question is asked.
He is a Bush , and we have had enough of them for a while.
He used to be a “severe conservative,” now he’s a “reformed severe conservative.”
The only really meaningful thing old Jeb has ever done is save us from an Al Gore presidency.
When our federal government was tiny, we had the most liberty.
But in those times, the public was far more religious than it is now. Hanging of criminals within hours of conviction was quite common.
Today we have near total government, the public at large is quite irreligious and crime is rampant, both within and without government. Convicted criminals are rarely executed, and we pay dearly to feed, house and entertain them.
I would argue that the best way to cut the size of government would be to pass a law that says all criminals found serving in government should be executed within 24 hours of conviction.
“The only really meaningful thing old Jeb has ever done is save us from an Al Gore presidency.”
Yes, but I wonder if Al Gore could have ultimately done as much damage to conservatism as George W. did. George W’s lukewarm moderatism layed the groundwork for Obama to become President.
My vote is an a**hole.
“He seems to be under the impression that the left wants the same thing we do, just has a different way to get there.
If so, he is dead wrong.”
Ding, ding, ding!
We have a winner!
Okay, but they didn't say the last word about politics either. If the Founders and subsequent generations had followed Rothbard's views, our country -- and our freedoms -- wouldn't have lasted as long as they did.
How sad, Jebbie is unsure still where he stands!
To me “RINO” isn’t valid anymore as a term to use. The whole mainstream Republican Party is what we term RINO. That makes “Republican in name only” = the whole damn Republican Party. I don’t tell anyone I’m a Republican anymore as that is saying I’m a RINO. Just say I’m a Conservative. Anything other than that is a RINO, period.
I agree. I thought G. W. Bush was a good man on a personal level. He had a bit of a conservative streak, and a way of connecting with people. In terms of the growth of government he was a disaster.
Only someone politically illiterate and completely ignorant of history could think Newt was a RINO of any kind, let alone comparable to Taxachusetts multiple-choice Romney or “tax collector for the welfare state” Dole. Newt made his name as a hard-line conservative right-wing rebel fighting against RINOs.
Just because something can be used for evil doesn’t mean it should be destroyed entirely. Then we wouldn’t have guns, knives, airplanes, cars, etc.
Ultimately it’s nice to say we need as little government as possible to prevent anarchy, but it’s just a platitude. Applying that principle in reality requires intense debate about what government should and shouldn’t do. We’re having that debate every day on every issue. For example, would completely legal drugs contribute to anarchy or prevent anarchy? I say they would contribute to anarchy. Libertarians think otherwise.
Bottom line is, unless you’re prepared to say there should be no government whatsoever, then somebody will always be “seizing” government and using it for what they believe will prevent anarchy. You’re adopting a special terminology to define your beliefs, but you haven’t discovered new beliefs, just new terminology.
"Who let those yahoos into the club" is another way of communicating his sentiment.
None of the conservatives in Texas who voted for Bush ever thought of him as one of them. But the other choices were Ann Richards etc. Even Bob Bullock, with whom Bush got along so well, was as liberal as Ralph Yarborough but like the Judge, sane. My estimate is the Bushes were and remain Rockefeller Republicans. New started out that way but found that such Republicans were drifting ever more to the left.
Keep out da Bushes!
“Youre adopting a special terminology to define your beliefs, but you havent discovered new beliefs, just new terminology.”
Not at all. For example, we have the following quote from the Father of the Constitution, James Madison:
I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.
That was from his remarks on the House floor in 1792 during a debate on the Cod Fisheries Bill.
The occasion for this was that Congress wanted to give money to a private party. Who in Congress today would dare to utter these words, except possibly Ron or Rand Paul? I think these words were true then and they are still true. I can read the enumerated and limited powers in the Constitution just as well as anyone else, yet I don’t see any power to pay private parties a single penny.
That is not a platitude by any manner shape or form. If this was the only point I could prevail on, it would cause such a contraction in the size of government that we would not recognize it. And in that fact I rest my case, for all major political parties since the time of Madison have been busy attempting to SEIZE control of the power of government to use for their advantage. And in the process they have changed the meaning of words and the meaning of the limits that the founders and designers of our own government placed upon it, limits that both parties continually erode and nullify if not by stealth then by amendment.
(The next Free Republic fundraiser might be a short essay contest on which Amendment was the most instrumental in redefining the Federal government. I would say the 16th because it totally destroys financial liberty.)
Bingo! Welcome to the club.
I suspect you’ve already... or soon will be attacked by the many socons here for allowing others to live immoral lives.
I got it! You want a fight!
Like Jeb, I was a Conservative too. Now I am ashamed to say it. I am ashamed of my lifelong party locally, statewide and nationally. I think a Constitutionist title and Tea Partier fits me now. Definitely not Libertarian for me.
You know what he did for me and others being cheated by the Insurance companies...I owe him my home and ability to live in it! I keep his personal letters framed and remembered often.
He is personally not like his father and “W”. He is softspoken and easy to talk to. I do not want him to run for anything in the future. If he had wanted to be a Senator he would have been elected. He was Florida’s best Governor in a long time.
You will never make me say anything bad about him! Take the fight elsewhere.
I don’t think that the name Bush will get anyone elected this year. More healing time is needed.
Jeb is an oblivious RINO.
Okay Jeb, you’re supposed to be a Catholic. Were you aware that we looked over the horizon and got the broader perspective that we Catholics, and other people of faith and/or conscience will have to pay for Obamacare abortion? Do you understand the 1st Amendment implications? No one has to *tell* conservatives to have fear.
Just go back to your bubble and take Rove with you.
Thank you. Says it all.
Jeb Bush has never been anything more than a conservative moderate ...or should that be a moderate conservative?
He’s been for amnesty for illegals, against drilling anywhere near Florida, etc.
I yell at the talking heads on TV everytime they mention Jeb, Christi or Daniels as possible nominees. They are all leaning to the left on too many issues.
it gets right down to it...the Bushes are jackasses
better jackasses then the democrats
but jackasses just the same...their women too...actually the women are simply libs married to jackasses who pretend to be sorta conservative
BushII gave us good SCOTUS nominees and was a fighter against the raggers..I will always appreciate that
but he was no perfection beyond that even though worshipped here by MANY
now yet another one...even worse this time..Mitty
what a mess...buncha silly white people without the balls to handle telling unpleasant truths
hey Jeb...I got half latino kids too hoss!
doesn’t stop me from speaking the obvious facts about how it is...and what we are...and where and what we come from
Awesome rant...and just exactly right. ;o)
This idiot of a politician is making me agree with Rev. Jackson, “Stay out of the Bushes!”
No I don't. Tea Partiers are "been asleep for decades Rip Van Winkles" that have finally pulled themselves away from their sports and entertainment long enough to see what their political inaction has wrought and realize they are small government conservatives. When Jeb says he's not a conservative he is saying he's not a Tea Partier. When he besmirches conservatives he besmirches you.
If I understand your meaning...I can not agree less.
I am a Tea Partier and I dare anyone to say I have been asleep for years. I was active on FR before the current system. My activity speaks for itself. Sports and entertainment did not totally take up my life, but now I do not even have TV. It is rubbish I do not want polluting my home.
When Jeb says he is not a Conservative he means the party has left him, just as it left me. I do not want him to run...ever again.
I will besmirch every Conservative I can who thinks just saying “I am a Conservative Republican” makes them above the fight. People who talk, but not walk, the effort to inform the sleeping public are my real enemies. I am sorry they can not see the evil things that are being done to this greatest of all countries.
Well, we will never agree, but lets keep fighting on the same team!
Romney told Politico...
He suggested that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush may have made a better Republican nominee, saying, “If I thought someone else could do a better job — I mean, I’ve said before, if Jeb Bush were running and in this race, I probably wouldn’t have gotten in.”
For Pete’s sake! I’m not putting YOU in the same category as the Rip Van Winkles.
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.