Conservatives not satisfied with Bush's record

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

[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