Posted on 03/12/2006 7:51:39 AM PST by SmithL
Washington -- The Republican rebellion that President Bush smacked into with the Dubai ports deal was the tip of an iceberg of Republican discontent that is much deeper and more dangerous to the White House than a talk radio tempest over Arabs running U.S. ports.
A Republican pushback on Capitol Hill and smoldering conservative dissatisfaction have already killed not just the ports deal but key elements of Bush's domestic agenda, and threaten GOP control of Congress if unhappy conservatives sit out the November midterm elections.
The apostasy in some quarters runs to heretofore unthinkable depths.
"If I had a choice and Bush were running today against (Democratic President) Bill Clinton, I'd vote for Bill Clinton," said Bruce Bartlett, a former Reagan administration Treasury Department official whose book, "Impostor: How George Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy," is making the rounds of conservative think tanks and talk shows. "He was clearly a much better president in a great many ways that matter to me."
Bartlett may lie at the extreme, but his critique taps into a strong undertow -- reflected in a sharp drop in Bush's support among his typically solid Republican base, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll released Friday.
"Bush's compassionate conservatism has morphed into big government conservatism, and that isn't what the base is looking for," said David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union. "The White House and the congressional leadership have got to reinvigorate the Republican base. In off-year elections ... if your base isn't energized, particularly in a relatively evenly divided electorate, you've got more problems than you think you have."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
The "mistakes" have been enormous, not sure I or any of the old conservatives, I know, would agree there.
The list you provided is the tip of the iceberg if the Dems get back in power with their mitts on our money.
But the GOP seems to be doing everything it can to facilitate this, doesn't that give you a hint that the Dem/GOP thing is a farce and it is just time for the old party flip or flop thing?
From 2001 to 2006, a 45% increase in on budget government spending.
The administration to compare with this one isn't Reagan's, it's LBJ's.
I agree with you completely on increased government revenues not being the point of tax cuts.
What this administration has done with massive new deficit spending alongside shrinking revenue is the worst of both worlds.
The national debt at the end of next year will be a larger fraction of GDP than at any time since 1955.
Paying that down will be a massive tax hike in the near future. Think 18% FICA, 45% top income bracket.
Why is it just "Bush spending" and not also "Congressional spending?"
Funny how that works.
i think they already did write line-item veto into law and it was thrown out by SCOTUS during the clinton admin.
If there is going to be a line-item veto, it is going to be by the amendment process, which congress is not required to participate in (though it can).
rather than being a mind-controlled drone for political purposes, isn't it nice to discuss major problems such as the federal deficit and debt?
Which threads should we concentrate on to 'engender enthusiasm for victory?' this sounds like something from the Ministry of Truth.
"Compassionate conservatism" means self-hatred. Real conservatives don't give a damn if others see them as "uncompassionate." The Bush years are a warning to those conservativevs who would trust a mushy moderate in the Oval Office. Moderates inevitably become liberals because they are timid, wishy-washy, vainglorious brown-nosers who run for the hills at the thought of not being loved by all. I've never heard of anyone who was a moderate out of conviction. To all you conservatives who think Bush is a real conservative, let me remind you that he tried to sneak a liberal, Harriet Myers, onto the Supreme Court, then had his wife call you a sexist for not supporting her nomination. Bush is a tool of liberal Republicans like Andy Card and Arlen Sphincter.
The old media is mining discontent again - sucessfully. Raise your hand if you think Democrats would have spent less than Republicans. This is not to say we need to get back control over the Republican Congress' spending. But let's admit that in this atmosphere of spending frenzy the Democrats would have had a blast that put Republicans big spenders to shame!
i think most of the party (democrats too to some degree) are what I call 'fortune 100 republicans' meaning they relate more to the needs and interests of the fortune 100 than the little people that actually voted for them. this is pretty clear in our trade policies, etc. since it requires money to be elected and then re-elected, it only follows that multinationals are going to have disproportionate influence in governments.
the problem then is that todays multinationals don't even consider themselves american. all the world is a market, and pesky issues like sheep's rights (that is us) that are inconvenient to the $$$ are things to be smoothed out (suppressed quietly)>
Yes, I know. A President who has yet to veto ANYTHING doesn't need it.
Hypocritial bastards. President Bush signed nothing into law that was not first passed by a Republican majority Congress.
Wake me when the Libertarians get behind the war on terror.
BooHoo....
Vote AGAINST it then!
""W campaigned to be irresponsible with our money?""
In a sense yes, he campaigned in 2000, on No Child Left Behind, Free Drugs for Seniors...guess you werent listening
"""Thanks for admitting that you stand for party over principle. Sieg Heil!!"
This is a perfect example of someone suffering from BDS
""Mexico is LOSING manufacturing jobs, as is guess who else CHINA.
See? In your own words the communists are winning.""
I dont think you understand what it was I wrote....China is losing manufacturing jobs...how is that "the communists are winning"?
""The national debt at the end of next year will be a larger fraction of GDP than at any time since 1955.""
That is incorrect. Back in the early 90s federal debt as a % of GDP hit about 66%. Now it is more like 60%. Since GDP is growing dfaster than the accumlation of debt, the debt to GDP level has bee nfalling since 2003, after rising in 2001-02
"Paying that down will be a massive tax hike in the near future. Think 18% FICA, 45% top income bracket."
Since when has the USA ever paid down debt?
The US loses jobs to Mexico, who loses jobs to China, who loses jobs to Viet Nam or Malayasia or the worst of the worst communist and totalitarian dictatorships. Communist slave labor camps are the common denominator of those countries at the bottom. So freedom loses, communist instigated slavery wins. What a world you wish on us!
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.