GOP slams Bush policies at retreat

The Washington Times ^ | 2/6/04 | By Ralph Z. Hallow and James G. Lakely

[ovrtaxt]

Growing frustration over President Bush's immigration plan and lack of fiscal discipline came to a head behind closed doors at last weekend's Republican retreat in Philadelphia.

House lawmakers, stunned by the intensity of their constituents' displeasure at some of Mr. Bush's key domestic policies, gave his political strategist Karl Rove an earful behind closed doors.

[The_Eaglet]

McCain-Feingold Unmade?-Daily Campaign Finance Reform Thread - Day 56

[kellynla]

"Good news. Seems our voices are being heard after all." I concur. And as long as the INS fails to enforce the immigration laws on the books and deports illegal aliens there is no "war on drugs", there is no "war on terrorism" and there is definitely no "homeland security!" Semper Fi, Kelly

[diotima]

The GOP's real base (i.e., those who actually vote for Republicans) actually turned out. But the self-proclaimed "base" didn't--as they've done since 1992.

Either you need to support this claim, or you need to stop making it. If you are referring to this quote:

***********
Exit Polling data.. religious right
2000.... 14% of which 19% claimed to have voted for Gore...
1996.... 17%

The following is the Rove quote that gets bantered about.......

"We probably failed to marshal support of the base as well as we should have," President Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, said yesterday. And by "the base" he means evangelicals.

There should have been 19 million of them, and instead there were 15 million of them. So four million of them did not turn out to vote. … But we also may be returning to the point in America where fundamentalists and evangelicals remain true to their beliefs and think politics is corrupt and therefore they shouldn't participate. … If this process of withdrawal continues, it's bad for conservatives, bad for Republicans, but also bad for the country. … It's something we have to spend a lot of time and energy on.
***********

then you need to provide some evidence that Bush has written off his base, other than your speculation. This quote doesn't support your claim.

[billbears]

And I'll be watching for your indignation in front of the Capitol when you finally realize the only thing politicians pay attention to is votes. No Constitutional issues, no concern over the size of government, no letters voicing your disagreement, no visits to your Congressional representation, just votes. Oh and money. Can't forget money now can we?

[Bikers4Bush]

"It's no great secret that some members of Congress don't agree with every single thing the president is doing," said White House spokesman Trent Duffy. "But he is trying to lead the country, to broaden the party. He promoted his ideas and his agenda for those in the room."

This part in particular is disturbing. "But he is trying to lead the country, to broaden the party." Not defend the constitution, shrink government, strengthen states rights or do the right thing but "broaden the party".

The agenda is clear, anything will be done to get voters and the administration will continue to whore itself out for votes.

[Neets]

I am NOT a member of the Constitutional Party.

Sorry.

[Bikers4Bush]

"So, if I support the President's immigration reform plan, I'm all for undercutting market rates and squeezing Americans from the labor market?"

Yes, and you're also in favor of rewarding lawbreakers.

Let me know if you need any additional obvious questions answered for you.

[billbears]

Never said you were. I was asking what you're going to do if the Republican party does not make at least a partial move to the right after the election as we're told time and time again it is going to do.

So when this great conservative move to the right does not come to fruition in 2006 or '08, or the 'right' judges are not appointed (much to your chagrine and moreso to mine), you're just going to continue to mold your views based on what the RNC tells you is conservative? I just want to know at what point you would choose conservative values over Republican platform planks.

[Bikers4Bush]

"And as long as the INS fails to enforce the immigration laws on the books and deports illegal aliens
there is no "war on drugs", there is no "war on terrorism" and there is definitely no "homeland security!" Semper Fi, Kelly"

An obvious statment that needs to be repeated over and over again until people wake up.

[looscnnn]

"I understand that they are trying to defer to their President and support his agenda with a united front, but the identity of the party matters."

I think the reason for them concentrating on Bush is that if people are unhappy with what he is trying to advance, the members of Congress pay for it. They may feel that if Bush does not change his stance on the issues, then the GOP could loose seats.

I am glad that the message is getting out there to put pressure on the GOP to change its stance on the issues.

[hchutch]

Why don't you change your username to something what will properly reflect the consquences?

Bikers4Kerry

I guess you should also have no trouble with sending that guy in Wilmette, Illinois, up the river. After all, isn't he a lawbreaker?

[TigersEye]

Bush is probably counting on getting more than one vote in exchange for losing yours.

ROTFLOL

[Sabertooth]

Tancredo let his name be used. If he were merely concerned that constituents know about this meeting, he could have notified them by letter. How many of his constituents read the Washington Times?

Tancredo does a good job of representing his constituents' voice in Congress. However, you must admit that he gets a lot of face time on the networks talking about this issue. That's all well and good, but it still doesn't negate that he broke the confidence of the retreat.

Karl Rove has jerked Tancredo around for a couple of years, when he should have listened to him. Tancredo owes him nothing. The Bush Amnesty is a colossal blunder, both as politics and policy, and all of the voices now trying to silence the tide that has swelled against it are the same voices who would see, hear, and speak no evil throughout the Predsident's first term.

I also criticize the others who broke confidence. In my opinion, they are even worse in that they did so anonymously.

Then you would perpetuate the problem rather than solve it, which is the insular failure of this White House to recognize how much they were putting the rest of the GOP agenda at risk by pushing ideas that anger significant portions of the Republican coalition.

You want lower taxes?
You want conservative judges?
You want to win the War on Terror?
You want to rebuild America's military and intelligence capabilities?
You want to protect the institution of marriage?

Well, all of that is at risk because of people who pretend, and insist that others pretend, that President Bush doesn't have a major problem.

[FITZ]

So, if I support the President's immigration reform plan, I'm all for undercutting market rates and squeezing Americans from the labor market?

That would seem to pretty much it. Replacing American workers with cheaper foreign workers is what it seems to be about. Also no mention of who will pay the health care and education costs or provide the housing assistance and food stamps for these cheaper workers.

[looscnnn]

"It would depend on the bill and what the wording was .. but if it's it a bad idea .. then don't pass it"

Kinda like the prescription drug bill? "We know it has problems, we just want to get it on the books and we can fix it later." This was proposed by Bush and yes they could have not passed or introduced it, but how would it look to have Bush pushing for it and them not passing it? It would cost seats or the WH.

[Bikers4Bush]

Why don't you address the issue instead of sidestepping it by mentioning my screename? I don't support democrats, I support conservatives. Feel free to insert the partyline screed about a vote for anyone other than Bush is a vote for a democRat BS. It's certainly won't be te first time I've read it.

If you're talking about the homeowner who shot the intruder I believe that any law barring law abiding citizens from owning a gun and having it in their home is unconstitutional and as such will be either changed or struck down.

The same does not hold true for criminal invaders.

[Poohbah]

You honestly believe enough of the citizens of Mexico will vote for Bush because of the amnesty that losing votes of Conservatives doesn't matter?

No, I believe that Americans will vote for Bush, while self-proclaimed "true conservatives" who voted for a third-party loser him will continue to vote for a third-party loser.

When the "base" doesn't turn out for a decade, they are NOT the base anymore.

[hchutch]

If it makes you better to feel that way, go ahead. I really don't care if you don't like my support for the President's position.

I'll increase what I have planned on donating to his campaign, though. And Lincoln Diaz-Balart's campaign will get one, too.

[Dane]

Ah, the obligatory Nazi reference. How utterly contemptible, Dane

That's not a nazi reference. Porgorom goes back to the Russians expelling the Jews.

[hchutch]

The law is the law - that's what they say with illegal immigrants.

Let that homeowner off, and you undermine the rule of law.

Be consistent about it.

I also think it is perfectly fair to point out the readily predictable consequences of the course of action you advocate in your tagline.

So, be honest about it, Bikers4Kerry.