Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush 43: Conservative movement is inconsequential
Washington Examiner ^ | September 15, 2009 | Byron York

Posted on 09/18/2009 12:51:21 AM PDT by neverdem

Former President George W. Bush addresses a Fourth of July crowd at the Let Freedom Ring 2009 festival at Crystal Beach Park Arena in Woodward, Okla., Saturday, July 4, 2009. (AP Photo)

How many times during the last eight years did you hear that George W. Bush was a dangerous right-wing extremist? Probably too many to count.

What you heard less often were expressions of the deep reservations some conservatives felt about Bush's governing philosophy.

Conservatives greatly admired Bush for his steadfastness in the War on Terror -- to use that outlawed phrase -- and they were delighted by his choices of John Roberts and Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court. But when it came to a fundamental conservative principle like fiscal discipline, many conservatives felt the president just wasn't with them.

You saw that throughout the 2008 Republican presidential primaries, when GOP candidates, while not mentioning Bush specifically, got big applause from conservative Republican audiences by pledging to return fiscal responsibility to the White House.

Those cheering conservatives will find a revealing moment in a new book, scheduled for release next week, by former White House speechwriter Matt Latimer.

Latimer is a veteran of conservative politics. An admirer of Republican Sen. Jon Kyl, for whom he worked for several years, Latimer also worked in the Rumsfeld Pentagon before joining the Bush White House in 2007.

The revealing moment, described in "Speechless: Tales of a White House Survivor," occurred in the Oval Office in early 2008.

Bush was preparing to give a speech to the annual meeting of the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC. The conference is the event of the year for conservative activists; Republican politicians are required to appear and offer their praise of the conservative movement.

Latimer got the assignment to write Bush's speech. Draft in hand, he and a few other writers met with the president in the Oval Office. Bush was decidedly unenthusiastic.

"What is this movement you keep talking about in the speech?" the president asked Latimer.

Latimer explained that he meant the conservative movement -- the movement that gave rise to groups like CPAC.

Bush seemed perplexed. Latimer elaborated a bit more. Then Bush leaned forward, with a point to make.

"Let me tell you something," the president said. "I whupped Gary Bauer's ass in 2000. So take out all this movement stuff. There is no movement."

Bush seemed to equate the conservative movement -- the astonishing growth of conservative political strength that took place in the decades after Barry Goldwater's disastrous defeat in 1964 -- with the fortunes of Bauer, the evangelical Christian activist and former head of the Family Research Council whose 2000 presidential campaign went nowhere.

Now it was Latimer who looked perplexed. Bush tried to explain.

"Look, I know this probably sounds arrogant to say," the president said, "but I redefined the Republican Party."

The Oval Office is no place for a low-ranking White House staffer to get into an argument with the president of the United States about the state of the Republican Party -- or about any other subject, for that matter. Latimer made the changes the president wanted. When Bush appeared at CPAC, he made no mention of the conservative movement. In fact, he said the word "conservative" only once, in the last paragraph.

Bush veterans are going to take issue with some of Latimer's criticisms in "Speechless." As an observer of it all, I certainly don't agree with his characterizations of some Bush administration officials. But looking back at the Bush years, the scene in the Oval Office adds context to the debate that is going on inside conservative circles today.

Right after the Republican Party's across-the-board defeat last November, there was a wave of what-went-wrong self-analysis. Republicans were divided between those who believed the party had lost touch with conservative principles and those who believed it had failed to adapt to changed political and demographic circumstances.

Bush's words in the Oval Office speak directly to that first group. You can argue whether Bush was a fiscal conservative at any time in his political career, but he certainly wasn't in the White House. And some real fiscal conservatives, with their guy in charge, held their tongues.

Now, with unified Democratic control of the presidency and both houses of Congress, we're seeing spending that makes Bush's record look downright thrifty. Republicans have again found their voice on fiscal discipline. And some of them wish they had been more outspoken when a president of their own party was in the White House.

Byron York, The Examiner's chief political correspondent, can be contacted at byork@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears on Tuesday and Friday, and his stories and blog posts appears on www.ExaminerPolitics.com ExaminerPolitics.com.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush43; byronyork; conservatives; gwb; miserablefailure; rino; rinoparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-122 next last
To: sickoflibs

Yeah me too, Bush played me all the way. I finally woke up when he wouldn’t close the borders.

I could kick myself now for playing the Democrats vs Republicans game.


81 posted on 09/18/2009 6:04:12 AM PDT by Tarpon (The Obama's plan -- Slavery by debt so large it can never be repaid...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Tarpon

This is why the supporters of the Republican party are going back twenty years and dusting off the speeches of Ronald Reagan to play on talk radio and putting his face on t-shirts to sell.

There was a Republican in the White House for the last eight years and now, considering the damage he did to conservativism, nobody wants anything to do with him.

But at the time, Republicans were falling all over themselves to defend him. If McCain had won in 2008, they would probably still be doing so.


82 posted on 09/18/2009 6:23:50 AM PDT by Storm Cloud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Marie2

Very well stated. Both Bush and McCain had good AND bad points, but at least they are transparent about them.

I agree with your post in detail.


83 posted on 09/18/2009 6:30:23 AM PDT by AFPhys ((Praying for our troops, our citizens, that the Bible and Freedom become basis of the US law again))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
“You GWB, are a failed president competing with Jimmy Carter”

He went way past Carter instead of Giving a foreign Country to the Whack Jobs (Iran) This Pompous Fool Gave America to the Crazies and made a point of continuously Insulting real Americans.

84 posted on 09/18/2009 7:11:19 AM PDT by Cheetahcat (Zero the Wright kind of Racist! We are in a state of War with Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
GWB: The republican Carter.

Sigh - he had such potential but devolved to bush41 country club liberalism.

85 posted on 09/18/2009 7:16:45 AM PDT by newfreep ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." - P.J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs; Impy

Bush is only slightly more conservative than my congressman, Mark Kirk (RINO-IL), a U.S. Senate candidate. Kirk is pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-gun control, pro-spending increases, pro-tax increases, pro-illegal alien, and anti-Iraq surge. If you know any Illinois conservatives, please ask them to support Dr. Eric Wallace, in the Feb. primary. His site is www.wallaceforillinois.com.


86 posted on 09/18/2009 7:21:37 AM PDT by PhilCollins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Bush: The Minutemen are vigilantes.
87 posted on 09/18/2009 7:34:24 AM PDT by windsorknot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

the rinos are part of the progressive movement with the democrats.

read “the shadow party” by david horowitz and richard poe.

george soros funds dozens of political action groups and controls the shadow party.

“the shadow party does not confine its activities to the democratic party. if it did,

it would be less effective. a number of notable republicans, among them senator john mccain,

have exchanged political favors with the shadow party.”


88 posted on 09/18/2009 7:46:25 AM PDT by ken21 (i am not voting for a rino-progressive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The only book I'll ever buy is Dick Cheney's.

Unless, of course, Dana Perino publishes one...

...with lots of pictures of her.

89 posted on 09/18/2009 7:57:21 AM PDT by Night Hides Not (If Dick Cheney = Darth Vader, then Joe Biden = Dark Helmet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
Um, Bush offered up Harriet Meyers for the Supreme Court and was chastized by the base and talk radio.

Correctomundo. The only reason we got Alito was because of the disastrous Miers pick.

90 posted on 09/18/2009 8:00:10 AM PDT by Night Hides Not (If Dick Cheney = Darth Vader, then Joe Biden = Dark Helmet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard
McCain would have sucked as President, but you're right, he'd still be a better President than 0bama.

I'm not so sure. McCain has been all over the map temperamentally for the past two years. At least the stimulus bill would have been vetoed.

McCain and Obama are both clueless in economic matters.

91 posted on 09/18/2009 8:04:53 AM PDT by Night Hides Not (If Dick Cheney = Darth Vader, then Joe Biden = Dark Helmet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: freedom_is_earned
Yeah, thanks for giving us Clinton, that was a real treat.

I don't blame the Perotistas one iota. The fault for Billy Jeff lies at the feet of George H.W. Bush. His campaign was absolutely terrible.

The Bush legacies (41 & 43) are tarnished IMO by their inability, or desire, to effectively use the bully pulpit of the Presidency.

92 posted on 09/18/2009 8:09:29 AM PDT by Night Hides Not (If Dick Cheney = Darth Vader, then Joe Biden = Dark Helmet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

How easy we are ... some nobody looking for his 15 minutes and 30 pieces of silver brays and we all jump on the bandwagon.


93 posted on 09/18/2009 8:13:46 AM PDT by Let's Roll (Stop paying ACORN to destroy America! Cut off their government funding!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"Look, I know this probably sounds arrogant to say...but I redefined the Republican Party."

Yeah, they redefined it virtually out of existence, creating the hysteria that rolled
Obama & Biden into the White House.

94 posted on 09/18/2009 8:16:48 AM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken21

I never finished reading that book, it’s still in my bedroom. I will look for that. Sometimes what we call RINOism is just a re-election strategy because they are in a liberal area, and liberal area’s grew under Bush.

I suspect that Shadow Party is having support problems since election day, that is why the democrats demonize 24/7, to keep liberals in campaign mode.

If Democrats stay in power for a while, Republicans will have a Shadow Party too.


95 posted on 09/18/2009 8:18:25 AM PDT by sickoflibs ( "It's not the taxes, redistribution is the government spending you demand")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Night Hides Not
I don't blame the Perotistas one iota.

I do. I also blame them, and some conservatives at this point, for not recognizing leadership (more W. than H.W.) and common decency (both, when it was in dire need) when they see it.
96 posted on 09/18/2009 8:18:53 AM PDT by freedom_is_earned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"'Look, I know this probably sounds arrogant to say,' the president said, 'but I redefined the Republican Party.'"

That you did George, that you did.
A real mensch. /sarc

97 posted on 09/18/2009 8:23:55 AM PDT by Landru (Arghh, Liberals are trapped in my colon like spackle or paste.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom_is_earned
I do. I also blame them, and some conservatives at this point, for not recognizing leadership (more W. than H.W.) and common decency (both, when it was in dire need) when they see it.

I have no problems with the points you're making. BTW, I voted for the Bushes in '92, '00, & '04.

Hopefully, there won't be any more Bushes on future ballots. I'm done with family dynasties, and the pedigree of an Ivy League education.

Sarah Palin got much more for the education dollar from the University of Idaho than from any Ivy League college.

How do I know that? I've had the good fortune in my life to interact with numerous UI alumni, and they're just as intelligent as any I've met with an Ivy League degree.

98 posted on 09/18/2009 8:36:31 AM PDT by Night Hides Not (If Dick Cheney = Darth Vader, then Joe Biden = Dark Helmet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Bush is inconsequential.


99 posted on 09/18/2009 9:04:47 AM PDT by djsherin (Government is essentially the negation of liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
We had a GOP Congress and White House for 6 years while the spending rivaled the worst Dimocrats years.

You are forgetting Jumpin' Jim Jeffords who defected from the GOP in early 2001. It was a 50 - 50 Senate with Cheney as a tie breaker until then. Tom Daschle became the Senate Majority Leader until January 2003.

That said, as a general rule, nothing gets done without 60 votes in the Senate.

Except for the Harriet Myers nomination for the Supreme Court, GWB tried to nominate conservatives to the federal courts. Remember the gang of fourteen. All in all, GWB was quite a mixed bag, IMHO, more notable for his fondness for loyalty than his appreciation of conservatism.

100 posted on 09/18/2009 9:07:11 AM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-122 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson