Conservatives not satisfied with Bush's record

The Washington Times ^ | June 18, 2002 | Ralph Z. Hallow

[jimkress]

Conservative lawmakers and activists disappointed with President Bush's first 18 months in office are calling into question his tactics and strategy in advancing the conservative agenda.

"The president for the most part has been our guy," said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, Texas Republican and a prominent conservative on Capitol Hill. "A few times we disagree."

[jimkress]

When Bush got elected I thanked God. Now I'm beginning to learn the truth of the aphorisms "Sometimes God punishes you by giving what you ask" and "Be careful what you ask, you may get it".

Bush is betraying the people who got him elected. Bush is betraying the 'principles' for which he claimed to stand.

We should address our letters to the White House to President G.W. Gore.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Unfortunately, these wimpy conservatives (and I include Armey and Barr) in Congress can't be depended on to do *anything* if push comes to shove

[Kibbylou]

Grow up and stop pouting.

[Lazamataz]

The Washington Times is printing what we have been saying for weeks, even months.

[SunStar]

Bush is betraying the people who got him elected. Bush is betraying the 'principles' for which he claimed to stand.

There is NO way that he can please all of us "conservatives". Even we the FReepers cannot agree on many issues. Having said that, how can the President also bring in new supporters from the "independent" and Democrat camps? You can't please everyone all of the time. And he is President of all Americans. That means he will irritate us on occasion. However, he has also done many things I agree with, something I never could have expected from Al Gore.

[SunStar]

Grow up and stop pouting.

BUMP

[Cacique]

Bush didn't betray anything. He kept telling us he was a "compasshionate conservative". He was annointed by the press and the RINOS that run the party. We knew what we were getting. Conservatives supported this Liberal on a budget knowing full well what he was. Another Clinton with less money to spend.

Time for conservatives to stop supporting this or that RINO and simply take over the Republican party from the bottom up.

If we want conservative candidates we will have to push our own. Not accept what the Rockefeller RINO country club Republicans running the RNC hand us.

[Lazamataz]

Grow up and stop pouting.

Refute the article and quit name-calling.

[ned]

So far, the dissatisfaction by many conservative lawmakers and activists with the administration's record during the past 18 months has not hurt Mr. Bush's popularity.

This is the fact that is hard to either dispute or ignore.

[GunsareOK]

And drink the coolaid?

[Poohbah]

We should address our letters to the White House to President G.W. Gore.

I'm sure the White House would pay rapt attention to those who engage in such mature and artful dialogue.

Let's get something straight, sport: four MILLION conservatives sat out Election 2000, or voted third party, or even voted for Al Gore!

The non-presence of the base in 2000 ultimately cost us the Senate. The now-mythical "base" hasn't bothered to show up since 1988, and the GOP was dumb enough to do fall-on-their-sword maneuvers not once, but TWICE, in vain efforts to appease them.

The GOP found a way to win without the mythical "conservative base" votes because they HAD to. Why should Bush do them any favors?

[jimkress]

Very few people hate Santa Claus and that's what Bush has been acting like - with our money!

[areafiftyone]

I am finding that since the Democreeps are doing a lousy job of bashing Bush and it is backfiring on them, the media is taking up the slack. They are constantly reporting on how conservatives are fed up with Bush. Its funny how Bush's approval rating among conservatives is extremely high. Who gives a dam what Congress thinks of the president. Congress is full of a bunch of people who only care about themselves and their money. This article is a bunch of Crap!

[meyer]

While I'm not entirely happy with some of the things Bush has done, his mild brand of socialism is nothing compared to what Gore would have brought us. I voted for Bush as the less "negative" candidate.

I don't think we can expect a quick turn towards the constitutional government that we're supposed to have; its going to take time. Why? Because for the last 8 years, we've been heavily brainwashed with the socialism message from virtually all our learning institutions, the media, and our elected officials. As light is shed on the truth, the people will come around (well, the majority of people anyways).

At least I hope so anyways.

[Poohbah]

I don't think we can expect a quick turn towards the constitutional government that we're supposed to have; its going to take time. Why?

Because we didn't get into the current mess overnight, and Constitution doesn't allow us to make a U-turn on a dime so quickly that we give back change.

[weikel]

Watch out the Bush bots will be screaming bloody murder.

[meyer]

Because we didn't get into the current mess overnight, and Constitution doesn't allow us to make a U-turn on a dime so quickly that we give back change.

I think I like your answer better. :^)

[AAABEST]

Extremely disapponted former Bush supporter bump.

[jimkress]

As light is shed on the truth, the people will come around (well, the majority of people anyways). At least I hope so anyways.

Once people are attached to the public teat I don't know if it's possible to wean them from it - absent major political or cultural revolution.

[JohnGalt]

I think a lot of the dissatisfaction lies with how un-original Bush has been in advancing the agenda. While Reagan had his team strip regulation after regulation behind the scene, Bush seems unable to accomplish even minor deregulation in sectors like tele-comm, while slapping a tax on imported steel.

I think many of us want to like Bush, but he has thus far been unable to sneak any Conservative legislation under the radar, the mark of a crafty politician.

[Lazamataz]

The non-presence of the base in 2000 ultimately cost us the Senate. The now-mythical "base" hasn't bothered to show up since 1988, and the GOP was dumb enough to do fall-on-their-sword maneuvers not once, but TWICE, in vain efforts to appease them.

So you're thinking that alienating the conservative base is a winning maneuver.

Well, I guess we shall see, since that is what he has done.

I know this: My only vote in 2002 will be for the Governor of Illinois. I will not be voting in any Federal-level Congressional or Senatorial races. I will not be contributing or volunteering for Bush in 2004, and unless he repeals the reauthorization for the Assault Weapons ban, will not be voting for him. If Bush's behavior is your definition of successful constituent loyalty-building, I beg to differ.

[weikel]

I will admit if I were President I would ignore the constitution and the other two branches and destroy all socialism using any means neccasary including training artillery on congress, arresting democratic congressman without charge etc. The lefts fight dirty and I would fight dirtier.

[Lazamataz]

Because we didn't get into the current mess overnight, and Constitution doesn't allow us to make a U-turn on a dime so quickly that we give back change.

Please explain how CREATING NEW FEDERAL ENTITLEMENTS (The Socialist Housing Program) is even steering slightly to the right.

This is plain-old Gore-like leftism.

[KC_Conspirator]

I think that sometime around February or March, Bush started listening to that pollster from New Haven, CT, Karl Rove. I understand that Bush will have to compromise at times, but there some of his nicey-nice ends up promoting harmful liberal policies. One example of this is his stance on the Palestinians.

[BlueLancer]

"I think many of us want to like Bush, but he has thus far been unable to sneak any Conservative legislation under the radar, the mark of a crafty politician."

I don't think anything will get done to the satisfaction of conservatives until .. AND IF .. control of the Senate and the House passes into Republican hands this year. If it does, I believe that we will see the wheels begin to turn; if it doesn't, then the only hope is to hold the line as best as can be.

Then again, if control of both houses do pass to the Republicans and nothing is done ... then I will stand naked in this forum and truly eat crow.

[Poohbah]

So you're thinking that alienating the conservative base is a winning maneuver.

The conservative base has demonstrated since 1992 that they are permanently alienated, and NOTHING will appease them. So he has to support the base that actually bothered to vote for him in 2000.

I know this: My only vote in 2002 will be for the Governor of Illinois. I will not be voting in any Federal-level Congressional or Senatorial races. I will not be contributing or volunteering for Bush in 2004, and unless he repeals the reauthorization for the Assault Weapons ban, will not be voting for him. If Bush's behavior is your definition of successful constituent loyalty-building, I beg to differ.

Like I said, if the conservative base hadn't been in a state of permanent temper-tantrum since 1992, they'd have a few markers.

They don't.

Sorry your buddies didn't back your move in 2000.

[DemoSmear]

bump

[Lazamataz]

AND IF .. control of the Senate and the House passes into Republican hands this year

In order to get control of these houses, Bush must energize his base.

He has depressed it greatly.

[Lazamataz]

The conservative base has demonstrated since 1992 that they are permanently alienated, and NOTHING will appease them. So he has to support the base that actually bothered to vote for him in 2000.

So okay. So you are writing them off.

Not smart, but it seems to be a tack being taken by Karl Rove.

I predict a Republican debacle in Congress and the Senate in 2002.

[Poohbah]

I will admit if I were President I would ignore the constitution and the other two branches and destroy all socialism using any means neccasary including training artillery on congress, arresting democratic congressman without charge etc. The lefts fight dirty and I would fight dirtier.

Would you then suspend Presidential elections to avoid the revenge the voters who elected those Congressmen you locked up?

I guess you subscribe to the idea of destroying the village to save it.

In case you missed the point: fighting for peace is like fornicating for chastity.

[doryfunk]

I am very displeased with the Bush presidency. However, voters should have known what to expect beforehand. Besides the association with his big government, U.N. loving father, GW Bush's own statements betrayed him. In a campaign speech he had the nerve to say that he was a strict constructionist of the constitution and would nominate strict constructionist judges. Less, than two minutes later, he said his top priority was education.

[ned]

Very few people hate Santa Claus and that's what Bush has been acting like - with our money!

Without public support, a president has no power. The best way to encourage a president to work for any part of your particular agenda is to demonstrate that the initiative has or will have broad public support. He certainly didn't arrive at the White House with a landslide mandate. I think that for the most part Bush has shown very good judgment and his popularity is a reflection of that good judgment.

[Poohbah]

So you are writing them off.

No, they wrote themselves off. When you don't vote for someone no matter how much he kisses your anal sphincter, he's going to remove the tongue at some point.

[texlok]

Grow up and stop pouting.

Why can't some of you actually come up with an intelligent response?

[Dane]

Besides the association with his big government, U.N. loving father, GW Bush's own statements betrayed him.

Sheesh you all have short memories. I guess unsigning the UN global court is accelerating globalism.

Of course you may not have a short memory but a small brain.

[Palmetto]

The conservative base has demonstrated since 1992 that they are permanently alienated, and NOTHING will appease them. So he has to support the base that actually bothered to vote for him in 2000.

I don't know where you get that the Conservatives didn't vote for Bush in 2000.

If that were true, we'd be here discussing President John McCain.

[Palmetto]

In case you missed the point: fighting for peace is like fornicating for chastity.

You cannot be serious.

[Poohbah]

I don't know where you get that the Conservatives didn't vote for Bush in 2000.

Four MILLION conservatives did not vote, or voted third-party, or voted for GORE on 11/7/2000.

That's where I got that.

[billva]

There is NO way that he can please all of us "conservatives". Even we the FReepers cannot agree on many issues. Having said that, how can the President also bring in new supporters from the "independent" and Democrat camps? You can't please everyone all of the time. And he is President of all Americans. That means he will irritate us on occasion. However, he has also done many things I agree with, something I never could have expected from Al Gore.

Unfortunately the whiners here don't understand this and expect to be made happy all the time. It isn't going to happen, ever! Good post.

[mel]

I agree

[Lazamataz]

No, they wrote themselves off. When you don't vote for someone no matter how much he kisses your anal sphincter, he's going to remove the tongue at some point.

Who do you think was voting for him in 2000? Who do you think was at Cheney's House protests? Who do you think was protesting at the Dade County closed-door recounts? Squishy moderate RINO's?

Who do you think votes at the midterms? Hardcore partisans, or relatively uninvolved voters?

Oh well, I know when your mind is made up. There's not much point in arguing it with you.

[AAABEST]

Because we didn't get into the current mess overnight, and Constitution doesn't allow us to make a U-turn on a dime so quickly that we give back change.

Lemme get this straight. You further legislation that tramples the amendments to the Consitution mentioned above, so you can fix it later. I think I'm getting this stuff.

It's all part of the big plan. To avoid the appearance of behaving as Constitutional Republic, we need to pass unconstitutional laws.

We also need to spend our people's money like a Kennedy on Methamphetamines so we can elect a few more RINOs to the Senate. This way the real GWB can emerge from the closet and reveal himself as the small government, "strict constructionist" who told us "it's not Washington's money, it's the people's money" a while back.

One question. You think he'll figure out a way (genius that he is) to undo his signature on the billions upon billions of our money he's already spent and the damage that's been done to our founding documents?

[billva]

I know this: My only vote in 2002 will be for the Governor of Illinois. I will not be voting in any Federal-level Congressional or Senatorial races. I will not be contributing or volunteering for Bush in 2004, and unless he repeals the reauthorization for the Assault Weapons ban, will not be voting for him. If Bush's behavior is your definition of successful constituent loyalty-building, I beg to differ.

Gosh, that's an intelligent approach. If you don't get what you want then pack your bags and leave. Boy will that solve the problem! NOT!

[weikel]

Socialism cannot be destroyed within the system by any legal means. The people on the dole will vote socialist to save their government money( like crack or heroin junkies) and women vote socialist by instinct. The government is also importing a flood of socialist 3rd worlders who have no intention of learning English and no loyalty to America.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship."

The left will have it be left wing dictatorship but as Pinochet showed in Chile it does not have to be so. Freedom and capitalism can be saved( as opposed to democracy which has nothing to do with freedom) but it can only be done if we are willing to do what it takes to crush the left.

[Poohbah]

Very well. I disagree with your assessment of the situation. I will oppose your efforts to destroy the Constitution to further your ends.

[Palmetto]

Four MILLION conservatives did not vote, or voted third-party, or voted for GORE on 11/7/2000.

The "voted for Gore" group is a red herring. No matter how much someone protests that they are indeed conservative, voting for Gore indicates that they are either lying or not paying attention.

The third party voters should indicate that Bush's campaign alienated at least some of the base.

However, the vast majority of true conservatives I know voted for Bush.

Again, if the conservative stayed home, voted 3rd party, or voted for the more liberal candidate, then why isn't John McCain President?

Better yet, explain what campaign tactic Bush employed to win the SC and CA primaries, which pushed him on to nomination.

[A Navy Vet]

"I don't think we can expect a quick turn towards the constitutional government that we're supposed to have; its going to take time. Why? Because for the last 8 years, we've been heavily brainwashed with the socialism message from virtually all our learning institutions, the media, and our elected officials."

Fair enough...but things like farm subsidies, unconstitutional campaign finance reform, and now home down payment GRANTS for minorities is not even attempting a "turn". Yes, I admire most of his foreign policy; yes, I think he's prosecuting the war correctly; yes, I'm glad he's told the UN to shove it a few times; and yes, he's done some good domestic things. But he's also helped further the socialist agenda in a number of cases. I can understand not having a radical agenda, but could he please stop giving so much away?

[weikel]

The constitution is already destroyed. Notice how the government never gets smaller.

[JohnGalt]

I think that analysis comes direct from the RNC, but I really do not accept that. There are several issues that appear centrist but would help push the Conservative agenda, like a temporary cut in the capital gains tax, just for example. There are enough Democrats who have to appeal to middle class voters who would support a 'temporary cut.'

In 2004, Bush could run on making the temporary cut permanent-- I am just spiffballing here as an armchair politician, but I can think of other issues like telecomm and biotech deregulation.

Marty Meehan, even here in Massachusetts, cannot afford to stand opposite Bush on the progress of those New Economy verticals.

[Lazamataz]

Four MILLION conservatives did not vote, or voted third-party, or voted for GORE on 11/7/2000.

In attempting to authenticate this figure, I scrolled through your responses on this forum for the last few days. I cannot find where you sourced this figure. Do you mind authenticating this figure for me?

As an aside: You are actively campaigning for the ignoring of the Conservative vote henceforth. This is certainly not conducive to the dominination of Conservative ideas and ideology, don't you agree?