And it's time to stop tearing down and start building. Folks on both sides of the Bush debate need to start listening to each other more, instead of being poised like trap-door spiders to jump on the words of the other side. Could Bush be more conservative? Heck, yes. But politically, CAN Bush be more conservative? That is the crux of the matter. To change that latter question in turn to heck, yes, we need to mint more conservatives. So we have this wonderful website, FR, that has exposed many people to conservative values. And then we have a thread like this one, with all the appeal to the non-FR world as a skunk in a Buick, and then we wonder why there are not more conservatives? Not too many people care to join a club where they eat their own...
Pass the salt. I'll drink to that.
What you say makes sense.
How dare you insult Buicks like that? A skunk in a Yugo maybe!
Just trying to keep it light.
I agree, although I don't consider FR a "club".
But it is nice these cannibals have moved to LP, isn't it? :)
You're right. Any suggestions as to how that can be accomplished?
It always seems like the dems have their blueprints in place and they're all working on building the same house.
Conservatives seem to have five or six different plans and we're each going to build our own and see who gets it done first. In the meantime we're all running around lighting the other one's partially finished structures on fire so we have a better chance of "winning".
Not very constructive.
I don't think many here would argue that GWB could be more conservative and we'd be happier. Unfortunately that makes him virtually unelectable.
I have to agree with Mr. Robinson on this one. I'm willing to take small steps in the "right" direction, knowing that the alternative is unthinkable.
I happen to believe that the mentality that says they're either going to stay home or vote third party to "teach him a lesson", is teaching the wrong lesson.
Every time we do that, the next electable candidate for the GOP goes further to the center. I think the message they're receiving is that about 60% of the country is in the middle and that's where they'd better govern from.
Funny, people have very short and selective memories. I loved Ronald Reagan, but he signed a lot of legislation that was less than conservative. He granted amnesty to illegals for one. The ACU wrote a scathing review and in his own words, he would never be able to please the far-right because for them it was all or nothing.
George W. Bush, like Ronald Reagan, realizes all too well that they are the President of all Americans.
The fact is that there are two areas that matter most to me. National defense and the judiciary. On both of those subjects there can be no argument that Bush is a conservative. For now, that's enough for me. I'm willing to support him for those two reasons alone, and work here in MN to get Wellstone out of the Senate.
Now, if he gets control of the Senate and keeps the House, and there is no change, then there's a problem. But for now I believe he has his eye on the ball and that's the 2002 elections. If we fail there, we'd better all pray real hard that there are no USSC retirements in the near future.