Skip to comments.Conservatives crucial to Bush's re-election restive about Iraq war
Posted on 07/11/2004 12:03:02 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Conservatives, the backbone of Bush's political base, are increasingly uneasy about the Iraq conflict and the steady drumbeat of violence in postwar Iraq, Halper and some of his fellow Republicans say. The conservatives' anxiety was fueled by the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse scandal and has not abated with the transfer of political power to the interim Iraqi government.
Some Republicans fear angry conservatives will stay home in November, undercutting Bush's re-election bid.
"I don't think there's any question that there is growing restiveness in the Republican base about this war," said Halper, the co-author of a new book, "America Alone: The Neoconservatives and the Global Order."
Another administration official involved in Bush's re-election effort has voiced concern that angry conservatives will sit out the election.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
The prison fiasco didn't bother me much, although it was a big embarrassment, watching our guys act like drunken high school kids...My problem with Iraq is that I honestly did not feel they were a direct threat to the United States. We could have keep that country under wraps with airpower for decades, killing or destroying anything that even appeared to be militarily *offense* in nature.
More than likely we could have even taken out Saddam and his kids, without putting one single soldier on the ground. I have no doubt about this.
I am actually more disturbed about the epic fraud and chaos being created by the invasion of our country by the millions enter illegally, routinely, at will, as this administration stands winking and nodding.
I happen to be a man of principle, one who believes that this attack on our borders and sovereignty is every bit as dangerous as any terrorist. This is *compounded* by the fact that trucks with unknown loads are entering this country as we speak from Mexico. Trucks that are routinely packed with hundreds of illegals, could easily be packed with something else. Mexico is a country where the law enforcment can be bribed with prostitues, and small amounts of cash.
Unlike some others, I take my vote *very* seriously, and only those that share my principals will get my vote.
"I take my vote *very* seriously, and only those that share my principals will get my vote."
In other words you are voting for Kerry.
Does Kerry share your principles?
So...what will Mr. Kerry do to secure our borders? Probably open them up even more, give away benefits like Governor Davis did. Standing by principles is honorable but often of course it's also self-defeating.
We could stop a lot of this crap by rolling over Fallujah. Shoulda done it in May. We'd almost certainly have bagged Zarqawi, and decapitated his org.
The casualty rate is perhaps 2% of what we were experiencing in Viet Nam, but the journopolemicists are playing it up, milking every casualty report. You'd think we were being driven out of the country in disorder, like the Chosin Reservoir action.
They also keep chanting, "draft, draft, draft!" They can't wait to get the draft going so they can cover draft "protests" mounted by Marxist agitprop pukes.
First of all, I'll believe what the SF Chronicle thinks about conservatives when I believe what Al Jazeera thinks about the War on Terror. They have no credibility here.
Secondly, I don't know a single conservative who believes all the BS the liberals are painting about the War in Iraq. The war is an undeniable success. We are making all the Middle East's garbage come to Iraq so we can snuff them out one at a time. That beats the prospect of having them come here and snuff out American civilians without warning.
I certainly hate the loss of life but if someone had told me in March 2003 that the U.S. could overthrow Saddam and institute a new (hopefully U.S.-friendly) government in Iraq with a loss of 1,000 U.S. troops, I would have said that was a bargain. Had Saddam truly had the WMDs we suspected, he could have wiped out that many in one day.
The benefits are huge. We've improved Israel's security. We've opened up a new source of oil so we can barter the Saudis from a position of strength. My hope is that we will get a military base somewhere in Iraq that will give us quick-strike capability to respond to anything done by Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Iran, Yemen, etc. And we're diffusing the bomb that is Islamic Jihadists.
I have major disagreements with some of what the Bush administration has done domestically. I also believe they have not been forceful enough in making their case on any number of issues where they needed to be more vocal. But I see no reason why conservatives in any serious number would abandon Bush over Iraq.
This is just a liberal wet dream as far as I'm concerned. It's not going to happen.
Are they suggesting that conservatives don't believe the Iraqi people were worthy of our intervention.
"If the conservatives have any brains they'll RUN to vote for GWB and the GOP and give GWB the senate he needs to BE CONSERVATIVE"
You are absolutely right. Thanks for posting it in large, bold letters. We need to elect more Republicans to Congress, so Bush can get his conservative agenda passed.
Doing anything else is cutting off our nose to spite our face.
Looking at Alan Keyes remarks this time around, its quite obvious that he supports the reelection of the Bush-Cheney ticket. In fact, I believe Pat Buchanan will be voting for PresBush. The "Libertarians" are a differenbt stroy, but only consitute less then 1/2% of all voters. The conservatives are with the President. Stop trying to blow this rightwing opposition to Bush`s reelection in 2004, all out of proportion.
"[W]hile there are the occasional dissenters speaking out from the rightwings anti-Bush contingent, I don't see the same level of serious opposition we Bush supporters encountered back in 1999 and 2000. I haven't experienced the same level of widespread vitriol coming from the rightwings vocal group of malcontents, misfits and militants. OTOH, there does seem to be more inflitrators this time around coming in from the Democrats wacko leftwing.
The fight remains with the Democrats who advance the liberal agenda and their endless attempts to employ pure propaganda to discredit the President, denounce the economic recovery and undermine the war effort. With their crazed rhetoric, the liberal establishment is making every effort to appeal to the paranoids and sickos in our society. Rational folk will reject this effort at every opportunity. Hang on though, its gonna be a bumpy ride on a rough road to victory."
"The fight remains with the Democrats who advance the liberal agenda and their endless attempts to employ pure propaganda to discredit the President, denounce the economic recovery and undermine the war effort. "
Exactly right. Conservatives need to realize that the real enemy is the Democrats.
And as The Wizard said in an earlier post, conservatives need to turn out to vote for Bush AND Republican candidates for Congress, so Bush can promote his conservative agenda, which is now being stymied in the Senate, because the Republicans don't have a sufficient majority.
It's either Kerry in 04 or Hillary in 08. Which is the worse of two evils? IMHO Hillary's criminal ways surpass Kerry's by a mile and while Kerry is an elite socialist, Hillary is a rabid Marxist.
I wonder if the anti-Bush conservatives prefer this immigration policy to Bush's:
Kerry vows to lift immigration ban on AIDS patients if elected [Lurch wants more AIDS votes]
Thanks for the link to the NR article.
"They also note later in the story that "A Pew Research Center poll last month found that 97 percent of conservative Republicans favored Bush over Kerry."
That means that 3% don't. In a close election, that may be a deciding factor putting Kerry into the White House -- God forbid!
Those are your Kerry Conservatives. The Clinton Conservatives had the same misguided "reasoning".....they wanted to "teach Bush 41 a lesson"...so they voted for Perot or they didn't vote at all...and the Liberals won. If Bush loses, Conservatives lose....big time.
"[W]hile there are the occasional dissenters speaking out from the rightwings anti-Bush contingent, I don't see the same level of serious opposition we Bush supporters encountered back in 1999 and 2000. I haven't experienced the same level of widespread vitriol coming from the rightwings vocal group of malcontents, misfits and militants."
This is encouraging, at least.
No U.N. general secretaryship for Slick, to erase the stain of impeachment.
No U.N. treaty surrendering the sovereignty and turning over the armed forces of the United States, in order to make Hillary the last President of the United States, and Slick the first President of the World (aka The Antichrist, I'm told).
No his-and-hers presidential gravesite.
No presidency for Chel.
No more solid grip on DemonRat Party funds, and no more solid grip on the tongues of Web Hubbell and Susan MacDougal.
Something to think about.
I think many conservatives, I among them, find it hard to abide the loss of several of our fine and brave servicemen every day, especially in this post-Saddam, post-coalition-rule era. And the apparent lack of appreciation (or understanding)by many Iraqis for ongoing US blood and money sacrifices is especially galling to many of the president's supporters when our forces are further hamstrung from taking the fight to the terrorists while remaining among their primary targets.All of the foregoing notwithstanding, a choice other than Bush is unthinkable.
Thanks for posting this! I've been looking for this cartoon. I hope it's OK, if I use it too, when appropriate. :)
As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.
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.