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.

[onyx]

Thanks for all your insights, seamole. I enjoyed talking to you tonight.

[ovrtaxt]

The percent of raving far right wingers is tiny. The percent of Conservatives, though larger, is still smallish.Are you telling me that President Bush, who IS the president of the entire country, should listen to and follow the farthest edge of the right? If so, then you don't understand politics at all.

Herein our dilemma is crystallized. You both have been injecting reality into this debate by referencing demographics.

I think what gets so many of us frustrated is the fact that Bush/Rove are expanding the party by morphing into left-centrists instead of educating people to the ideal of small government conservatism. It's not that hard when you have the bully pulpit. Reagan did it relentlessly. It's also a lot cheaper, and it actually does the nation good in the long run instead of actual harm, which many of his proposals will do.

Just yesterday I got into a discussion with an extreme leftist, a highly educated, wealthy Jewish lady with Democrat stickers all over her minivan (a customer, and I still made the sale- lol) and she had never even heard of the Libertarian Party. (I wasn't pushing the LP, but when I referred to it, her ignorance was startling.) We started talking politics, she was spouting the Bush conspiracy line about Iraq, blablabla, and I started talking about limited government. She was in complete agreement, but all she knew was the party line of the Dems.

My point is the need to reach people like that, they can be educated. All the spending and stuff isn't going to bring them in. A fresh outlook will, with some of them.

In the meantime, I'll just make as much noise as possible to counteract the mass stupidity out there.

"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups."

[ovrtaxt]

Thanks for that link. Good catch.

[Lazamataz]

I have seen numerous posts on this thread so far alleging widespread dissatisfaction with the direction the Republican Party has been taking in recent years. Earth to Freepers: the market is signalling the Republicans that they are doing everything right. Some of us have wondered over the years whether we would ever live to see the day that Republicans would hold the White House, both houses of Congress, and a majority of the Governorships. Not only do they have that now, they increased their majorities in both houses in the last election. If I run the GOP, and you come to tell me that I'm doing it all wrong, I am going to dismiss you as a nut.

Your post is spot-on.

However, it's evident that the current direction of the country is increasingly socialist no matter what party is in power.

In short: America is screwed. We're going socialist, people. Might as well get used to it.

[tgslTakoma]

Principles did NOTHING for those who claim that they have them, but the rest of us don't, during the Clinton years.

And we can all go and yell our lungs out, in front of the White House, IF Kerry wins, but that won't do a damned bit of good in stopping him doing awful things. There are NOT, and probably never shall be,enough numbers on our side, to make protesting the other side as big a deal, as the lunatics who pranced and shouted at Nixon. That doesn't mean I think FREEPS should stop; it means that NOT working to oust Dems, is far more important, than giving aid and comfort to them, by going fringe.

The problem I am noticing with your comments above and elsewhere is that you continually want to call those who do stand on principle "fringe" when in fact, they are not the fringe. They have principles, be they WRT limited government, fiscal responsibility, secure borders, and other conservative issues; and you and others appear so insecure in your "platform" that you resort to insults and stomping your feet when you are faced with those who do have firm principles.

It's all been pretty much agreed that none of us wants our national security left to the leftists in the Democrat party. But those of us who are unhappy (to use a mild descriptor) with the direction of the president's administration thus far on our core issues do not want to sit idly by as our party and our president and our representatives veer left towards the cliff.

So we speak out, and are promptly set upon for speaking out.

The better course of action, IMO, is for the voices of discontent to be heard rather than shouted down, so as to get the administration's attention before it's too late for them to take corrective action.

Shutting down discussion by shouts of "fringer" and "go ahead and stay home, we don't need your vote anyway," and "troll" and all the other stuff is counterproductive destructive. Disagree with the argument presented, and offer proof that it is incorrect, but save the schoolyard battle tactics for the schoolyard. Thanks.

[kristinn]

I was watching Lou Dobbs last night. He had a report on the hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs U.S. companies have sent to Mexico as a result of NAFTA. Couple that with the millions of illegals pouring in from our southern border taking American jobs and it would appear that the true "unappeasables" are Vicente Fox and the Mexican government. Because no matter how much we give them, it's never enough so we offer more.

BTW, if you're going to trash someone you should ping them. Also the Admin Moderator has again asked that we refrain from using profanity in our posts.

[kristinn]

Thanks for the link to your informative essay about the Medicare reform bill. Let's hope it works as intended. I'd rather see the federal government get out of the socialist unconstitutional programs of the New Deal/ Great Society eras, but that day is a long way off, if ever.

[NittanyLion]

Either we really are statistically insignificant, in which case it should be a matter of supreme indifference what we do with our votes and our money-- OR we really do hold the key to the election in our hands, in which case our concerns shouldn't be met with such dismissive scorn.

I've always loved the irony..."Throw your temper tantrum, you One-Percenter. No one cares what you do. And BTW, if [Insert Candidate Here] loses, it's on your head."

It's laughable. All the more so because I support GOP candidates, but there are some here too simplistic to discern honest criticism from disruption.

[kristinn]

Thank you. If we don't make our voices heard now, it'll be too late come November.

[NittanyLion]

Earth to Freepers: the market is signalling the Republicans that they are doing everything right...they increased their majorities in both houses in the last election.

Good post Nick. However in regard to this point, I'd suggest past performance is hardly a predictor of future success. We had a very different set of circumstances in place in 2002. Obviously 9/11 was a more recent occurrence, but also the administration had not veered left with the likes of Prescription Drug Bills, amnesty, etc.

Pre-2002 I'd submit this administration was acting far more conservative than it has since. They'd have been well-advised to continue on that course, yet here we are.

That's the point of many of us here. This leftward drift is actually damaging Bush's reelection chances, and some of us are trying to surface the issue before it's too late.

[kristinn]

Thanks for the kind words about the D.C. Chapter. I'm well aware of the compromises involved in politics and governing. Where one draws the line on core principles can be very frustrating and at times lonely. In '98 the party did not want impeachment. We on FR, and others on the "fringes," stood by our principles and carried the day. We're not going to win them all. But we must try, if only to be able to live with ourselves.

[gatorbait]

True ,look around again.. where did those two go anyway?

Which two would that be?

[NittanyLion]

Since you vote in Massachusettes, it doesn't really matter how you vote or who you vote for. The democrats have your state smothered.

Unlike that bastion of conservatism you're running out there on the Left Coast. LOL.

[gatorbait]

seriously question this quantum leap to the left by Republican

I have to disagree with that statement. A quantum leap to the left happened in 1992.November to be exact.The "base" "punished" Bush41.They were so good at that, they spread the joy to the rest of us.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

another two,not you. ;}

[sauropod]

"The same damn group of "uber conservatives" that congregate here every night?"

LOL! I know somebody else on this forum that uses this phrase.

Often and unwisely.

[Kudsman]

bttt

[NittanyLion]

A quantum leap to the left happened in 1992.November to be exact.The "base" "punished" Bush41.They were so good at that, they spread the joy to the rest of us.

The truth of the matter is that the second choice of most Perot voters was Clinton. It makes sense if you think about it: People motivated to vote for Perot were disillusioned with the status quo and wanted an outsider. Of Bush and Clinton, which one more closely represented that ideal?

If not for Perot, Clinton would have won by a larger margin. The claim that the base deserted Bush in 1992 is an urban legend.

[sauropod]

Maybe they are. Lessee what happens in November.