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

Skip to comments.

Conservatives, Cut Bush Slack
The Chicago Sun-Times ^ | June 22, 2002 | Thomas Roeser

Posted on 06/22/2002 9:46:05 AM PDT by quidnunc

This summer will mark the 47th year since I took my first Republican job: as public relations director for the party in Minnesota. Since then I have rarely strayed from politics, or my party. I served as a staffer to two GOP congressmen, to a GOP governor, as a federal appointee to Richard Nixon and as a corporate executive who supported in Washington and Springfield much, if not all, of the Republican agenda.

You can describe me as a conservative. Thus I am qualified to say that although I dearly love conservatives, they tend to be querulous, disagreeable and threaten revolt when Republican office-holders don't please them. So it is now with George W. Bush. Here is a president who has surprised us all with the firmness and resolve he showed after 9/11. I must tell you I voted for him with less enthusiasm than I had for many of his predecessors. But his administration has pleased me often — most notably on two issues: defense of America and social policy.

Yet, Bush has to get re-elected in a country that is evenly divided on philosophy. Thus he must occasionally — on matters that sometimes offend conservatives — dip into the other side's ideology for support. He has done so on three notable occasions: on the issue of steel protectionism, where he departed his free-market proclamations; on the signing of a campaign finance bill tailored by his enemies, and allowing his attorney general (in the words of Libertarian Nat Hentoff in the Washington Times) "to send disguised agents into religious institutions, libraries and meetings of citizens critical of government policy without a previous complaint, or reason to believe that a crime has been committed."

In a perfect political world, where conservatives are in the majority, these things would be sufficient to encourage a boycott of the polls. Either that or a protest vote for the Democratic opposition. But we are not in a perfect world. We conservatives have a president who didn't receive a majority of the votes, and has one house of Congress against him. He must make compromises to get re-elected. Conservatives who do not understand the nature of politics ought to stay in their air-conditioned ivory towers and refrain from political activity altogether. If they cannot adjudge the stakes in this election and the difference between Bush and an Al Gore or a John Kerry (D-Mass.) or a Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), they are foolish indeed.

-snip-

To read the remainder of this op/ed open the article via the link provided in the thread's header.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,081-2,1002,101-2,1202,121-2,140 ... 2,241-2,242 next last
To: Southflanknorthpawsis
That parody wasn't the only one and Howlin wasn't and isn't the only target.

I do not approve of the misuse of his talent in this way.

2,101 posted on 06/24/2002 12:04:03 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2097 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
His task is formidable: slow down the liberal leviathan.

And CFR does this how?

2,102 posted on 06/24/2002 12:04:03 PM PDT by Free Vulcan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2090 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan
I didn't support the farm bill and consider it corporate welfare. I believe many of the beneficiaries will be the giant farming conglomerates. OTOH, don't you think most medium and small size farms are owned by conservative Republicans? I do. Was it a pure political decision by PresBush? Sure. But even PresReagan signed a farm bill that produced pretty much the same policy. All presidents sign such bills, because its good politics. In that regard, its a principled decision, just not one I agree with. Farming is also an issue related to foreign competition and the price controls that are placed on imports of American mechandise, by those governments of foreign nations.
2,103 posted on 06/24/2002 12:04:07 PM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2087 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz; Southflanknorthpawsis; DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
I can vouch for it. I have seen at least one.

Fair enough. I haven't seen them, so I won't comment on the validity of your conclusions one way or another.




2,104 posted on 06/24/2002 12:05:29 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2096 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I've seen them as well. If past experience is true, if links were given, they would instantly disappear.
2,105 posted on 06/24/2002 12:06:19 PM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2093 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
The one about Howlin was not pretty. Reg is a great guy and this sort of stuff only dilutes his moral high-ground.
2,106 posted on 06/24/2002 12:06:50 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2104 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I was going to ask for evidence and links. Should I bother?

If you are challenging my honesty, that is your choice.

I would rather not turn this thread into a focus on the graphics. Maybe I'll consider freepmailing you the links.

I'll think about it. But, as I said......I've experienced a mysterious vanishing act when this type of circumstance has arisen in the past.

2,107 posted on 06/24/2002 12:07:17 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2093 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Where dat?
2,108 posted on 06/24/2002 12:08:45 PM PDT by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2100 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
I'm not going to post it. You can ask if Howlin wishes to share it with you.
2,109 posted on 06/24/2002 12:09:53 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2108 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Your marxist jpeg? FR mail it.
2,110 posted on 06/24/2002 12:11:04 PM PDT by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2109 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
If you are challenging my honesty, that is your choice.

No, I just ask for evidence when I see a statement like that.

Since several witnesses have spoken up, I'll take you all at your word on the objective fact that the graphics existed.

I'll withhold a subjective opinion as to their content, since I didn't see them.




2,111 posted on 06/24/2002 12:11:43 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2107 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I'll withhold a subjective opinion as to their content, since I didn't see them.

Sabe, you and I seem to be of the same intellect, mindset and objectivism.

So I hope I lend a little credibility when I say that it was not pretty.

2,112 posted on 06/24/2002 12:14:12 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2111 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz; Kevin Curry; Texasforever; Miss Marple; Howlin; ArneFufkin; Grampa Dave; Mo1; ...
"Your posts are so filled with invective, bile, and complete mistatements that I see no meaningful benefit to any interchange with you whatsoever."

Actually Laz, I think Kevin was spot on, you have at least 300 post on this thread alone and Kevin made a very fitting summary of your contributions. But I guess we could always take a vote

2,113 posted on 06/24/2002 12:16:42 PM PDT by MJY1288
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2095 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
So let me see, it's a good principled decision because it's good politics? And how can that possibly translate into good policy? And then why should I have a problem with Bill Clinton and his 8 years? On that note, it would seem bad politics to cater to large corporate farms if the medium and small farmer makes up your core constituency. How then could the farm bill have been a political decision?

Reagan may have signed a bill similar in structure, but not similar in magnitude and complexity. I know, my mother has worked for the FSA since '87, and she can tell you that this bill dwarfs in magnitude and complexity over even what we got now, much less '87.

You are missing my point. What did we conservatives gain from the Farm Bill? NOTHING. We gained absolutely nothing. Compromise is walking away with half a loaf, capitulation is walking away with nothing. And we walked away with nothing. How does this advance conservatism?

As far as the farm issue, it is based on added value agriculture, which is where we need to put our eggs, not on subsidization, which does nothing but keep the current problems alive.

2,114 posted on 06/24/2002 12:17:27 PM PDT by Free Vulcan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2103 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
HAH! A vote! LOL!

Fallacy: Appeal to Popularity (argumentum ad populum)

Definition: A proposition is held to be true because it is widely held to be true or is held to be true by some sector of the population.

This fallacy is sometimes also called the "Appeal to Emotion" because emotional appeals often sway the population as a whole.

Examples:
(i) If you were beautiful, you could live like this, so buy Buty-EZ and become beautiful. (Here, the appeal is to the "beautiful people".)
(ii) Polls suggest that the Liberals will form a majority government, so you may as well vote for them.
(iii) Lots of my friends say that Kevin Curry is right when he spewed a lot of invective, bile, and complete mistatements about Lazamataz, so it must be true.

References: Copi and Cohen: 103, Davis: 62


2,115 posted on 06/24/2002 12:24:40 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2113 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288; Kevin Curry; Lazamataz
IMO, Kevin's post could have been made less crudely, but I agree with the general premises he stated.
2,116 posted on 06/24/2002 12:26:35 PM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2113 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
My ears are ringing...what's going on?
2,117 posted on 06/24/2002 12:28:41 PM PDT by Registered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2112 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
IMO, Kevin's post could have been made less crudely, but I agree with the general premises he stated.

I couldn't penetrate the crudity or the incorrect and scurrilous claim that I am pro-drug, so I read no further.

2,118 posted on 06/24/2002 12:29:14 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2116 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan
I'm not disagreeing with you. Clean out your eyes or clean off your monitor screen. I've already told you, I didn't support it and was very clear about that. But that doesn't change the politics of the decision. Its my opinion that most small businesses are owned by conservatives and conservative minded people in general. Many of these people are Reagan Republicans (in the 80`s Reagan Democrats) and these small businesses include what was once called "the family farm". No, it doesn't fit the agenda of conservatism, but not everything in politics and governing does all the time.
2,119 posted on 06/24/2002 12:29:51 PM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2114 | View Replies]

To: Registered
My ears are ringing...what's going on?

Two things are happening:

1) We are not permitted to entertain any criticism of G.W. Bush, and we are instructed to get back into ranks.

2) I was agreeing with some other people that you are misusing your incredible talents when you use them to parody people on this forum.

2,120 posted on 06/24/2002 12:30:50 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2117 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,081-2,1002,101-2,1202,121-2,140 ... 2,241-2,242 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