[jimkress]

When Bush got elected I thanked God. Now I'm beginning to learn the truth of the aphorisms "Sometimes God punishes you by giving what you ask" and "Be careful what you ask, you may get it".

Bush is betraying the people who got him elected. Bush is betraying the 'principles' for which he claimed to stand.

We should address our letters to the White House to President G.W. Gore.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Unfortunately, these wimpy conservatives (and I include Armey and Barr) in Congress can't be depended on to do *anything* if push comes to shove

[Kibbylou]

Grow up and stop pouting.

[Lazamataz]

The Washington Times is printing what we have been saying for weeks, even months.

[SunStar]

Bush is betraying the people who got him elected. Bush is betraying the 'principles' for which he claimed to stand.

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.

[Cacique]

Bush didn't betray anything. He kept telling us he was a "compasshionate conservative". He was annointed by the press and the RINOS that run the party. We knew what we were getting. Conservatives supported this Liberal on a budget knowing full well what he was. Another Clinton with less money to spend.

Time for conservatives to stop supporting this or that RINO and simply take over the Republican party from the bottom up.

If we want conservative candidates we will have to push our own. Not accept what the Rockefeller RINO country club Republicans running the RNC hand us.

[ned]

So far, the dissatisfaction by many conservative lawmakers and activists with the administration's record during the past 18 months has not hurt Mr. Bush's popularity.

This is the fact that is hard to either dispute or ignore.

[Poohbah]

We should address our letters to the White House to President G.W. Gore.

I'm sure the White House would pay rapt attention to those who engage in such mature and artful dialogue.

Let's get something straight, sport: four MILLION conservatives sat out Election 2000, or voted third party, or even voted for Al Gore!

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.

The GOP found a way to win without the mythical "conservative base" votes because they HAD to. Why should Bush do them any favors?

[meyer]

While I'm not entirely happy with some of the things Bush has done, his mild brand of socialism is nothing compared to what Gore would have brought us. I voted for Bush as the less "negative" candidate.

I don't think we can expect a quick turn towards the constitutional government that we're supposed to have; its going to take time. Why? Because for the last 8 years, we've been heavily brainwashed with the socialism message from virtually all our learning institutions, the media, and our elected officials. As light is shed on the truth, the people will come around (well, the majority of people anyways).

At least I hope so anyways.

[weikel]

Watch out the Bush bots will be screaming bloody murder.

[AAABEST]

Extremely disapponted former Bush supporter bump.

[JohnGalt]

I think a lot of the dissatisfaction lies with how un-original Bush has been in advancing the agenda. While Reagan had his team strip regulation after regulation behind the scene, Bush seems unable to accomplish even minor deregulation in sectors like tele-comm, while slapping a tax on imported steel.

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.

[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.

[mel]

I agree

[Taiwan Bocks]

"The president for the most part has been our guy,"

Not that you care about what true Constitution loving,
God-fearing,
patriotic Americans think;

But somewhere around your, Mr. Bush's, last sodomite appointee,
or the Education (PORK) budget,
maybe it was Laura's "Hillary moment" commenting on "THE FENCE" the day before so many were murdered...
or was it since we heard the military was TOLD NOT TO SCRAMBLE TO INTERCEPT THE HIJACKED PLANES ON 9-11, one of those events sealed it,
I thought I was Republican forever,

But you lost me and a lot of me's like me, Mr. Ex CIA Director's son.

[SerpentDove]

I'll go to the polls and pull the lever for Bush next time, probably.

But will I enthusiastically campaign for him at the grassroots level, like I did last time?

No way.

[FourtySeven]

I used to criticize Bush for his CFR debacle, but now I'm not so sure. After thinking about it, what could he have done about it? Veto it and then be persecuted for doing so during the 2004 election? Sure, many here on FR say he should have done that anyway, because it's a matter of principle. But we here at FR tend to forget sometimes that the true conservative isn't in the majority in this country; we don't even have much of a base in the Republican party itself. Thus, unless we want to have NO conservative in the Oval Office, we shouldn't punish him for that one mistake (and it was a mistake). As far as the "principle" of the matter goes, when have you known ANY politician that has total principle? Anyone who believes that is living a pipe dream in my opinion. Even if the Libertarian candidate for President were to be elected someday, he'd eventually fall to the same "politics as usual" in Washington; at least Bush seems to play the game well.

As far as the other issues raised in this article, I don't really have a problem with any. For example, certainly the Education bill is the largest ever, but at least the National Testing got through, and I think that might have been more important then any voucher program. (I never really supported the idea of vouchers anyway; I don't know how even strict Constitutionalists can support that idea). The national testing is important though, because it's a step in the right direction: FINALLY holding accountable (if only in a small way) the TEACHERS for their performance.

In conclusion, I don't think Bush is a bad job. I AM disappointed that he broke his campgain promise and signed CFR, but if he hadn't, there would be this tremendous, LIBERAL feeding frenzy, that may have even hampered the war effort,(because a great many of Bush's proposed wartime legistlation/funding may have gotten tied up in Congress as a backlash) and thus, could have maybe even put us in physical danger. Not to mention John McCain would've had a perfect springboard for 2004, and I think most, if not all of us here, can thank the LORD he didn't win the primaries in 2000. We can all see now, that despite any liberal underpinnings Mr. Bush might have, McCain would've made him look like Spiro Agnew.

[sheltonmac]

Ask the staunch Bush supporters why their conservative messiah signed the Education Bill, Campagin Finance Reform, and the Farm Bill and they'll say that it's all part of his brilliant strategy to take these issues away from the Democrats. Of course, I don't buy this theory. I find it very peculiar that if Clinton had signed the aforementioned bills "conservatives" would have been up in arms, but because a compassionate conservative signed them it must be part of some master plan. It's actually quite pathetic.

[Redbob]

"Bush is betraying the people who got him elected."

Bullsh*t!
Bush is simply signing legislation that Congress is sending him.
In doing so, he's serving notice that the "free ride" is over for congresscritters who want to vote for something they "oppose" in the secure knowledge that the President will veto it, and the President will take the heat for the veto, not them.

People that frost me are those like Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas who VOTE FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, then come back home and try to talk like conservatives!

[exmarine]

I do not plan to vote for Bush in 2004. He disappoints me greatly. I simply do not agree with most of the legislation he has supported. It's all big spending. I am particularly incensed at his attitude toward immigration. He may pick up a few percents among hispanics but he will lose much more than that in conservative votes.

[Badray]

Dittos bump