Thread: Conservatives ask: Is Bush still one of us?

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0206/p01s03-uspo.html

from the February 06, 2006 edition

Conservatives ask: Is Bush still one of us?

Some of his State of the Union proposals are raising eyebrows.

By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON – From the moment George W. Bush began campaigning for the Oval Office in 1999, White House watchers have wondered what kind of president he would be: The Ronald Reagan of his generation? Like his father, the first President Bush? Perhaps even, in some ways, similar to Bill Clinton?
This year's State of the Union address, which was panned by a chorus of conservative commentators, has intensified the debate about Bush's political philosophy.


The Wall Street Journal editorial page accused President Bush of playing "miniball," code for a Clintonian love of "small political ideas." Robert Novak reported private concern among congressional conservatives that Mr. Bush was moving toward bigger government. George Will called Bush's most memorable line - that America is addicted to oil - "wonderfully useless."

"He's conservative by temperament; many of his policy positions, such as cutting taxes, are on the right side of the political spectrum," says John Green, a political scientist at the University of Akron in Ohio. "But he doesn't have a consistent set of conservative principles. That's what a lot of the complaint has been about, especially after the State of the Union."

Specifically, Bush's education initiative, No Child Left Behind, and the expensive new prescription-drug benefit for seniors have left many conservatives wondering whatever happened to the party's commitment to small federal government. Bush's immigrant guest-worker program also divides Republicans. And as the Iraq war drags on, so, too, are conservatives increasingly conflicted.

Columnists, of course, aren't usually running for election, or trying to protect their party's slim majority in Congress, as Bush is doing. And they often don't represent the views of rank-and-file voters. A Gallup poll of State of the Union watchers, two-thirds of whom were Republicans, showed a 75 percent positive rating, including 48 percent who were "very" positive.

But pundits can also be the canary in the coal mine. When Bush nominated his counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, conservative columnists raised doubts about her reliability on key issues. Her nomination was withdrawn.

Richard Viguerie, the direct-mail guru who helped fuel the Reagan revolution of 1980, asserts that Bush's inconsistency as a conservative has alarmed many of the most active members of the party - the donors, fundraisers, and grass-roots activists who drive turnout on election day. A recent online poll by Mr. Viguerie of more than 1,000 conservative activists found that 67 percent say Bush is not governing as a conservative, and 64 percent give him a D or an F on government spending.

Even though Bush won't be on the ballot, conservative disappointment in him could hurt the Republican Party in this November's midterm elections, he says.

"The party has been hijacked by big-government Republicans," says Viguerie, hinting that it might be good for the party to lose congressional power later this year. "The importance of losing elections is greatly underrated," he adds. "There's not any way Ronald Reagan would have been elected in 1980 if [Gerald] Ford had been elected in '76."

Among conservative columnists, perhaps one of the president's staunchest admirers is Fred Barnes, editor of the Weekly Standard. In his new book, "Rebel-in-Chief," he delves into the tricky terrain of defining Bush's philosophy as president. "Big-government Republican" doesn't capture Bush, he suggests, nor do comparisons to recent presidents.

"His strategy is to use government as a means to achieve conservative ends," Mr. Barnes writes. Thus, instead of trying to abolish the Department of Education, the Reagan-era position, Bush has sought to achieve the conservative goal of accountability in public education by requiring testing and then sanctions for schools that fail to meet standards.

Mr. Barnes separates presidents into two categories - those who govern and those who lead. He places Bush in the latter category, observing his penchant for far- reaching initiatives. Looking at the issue of presidential temperament, Barnes writes, "Bush is actually a mixture of FDR [Franklin Delano Roosevelt] and TR [Teddy Roosevelt], with FDR's cool optimism and TR's pugnacity and determination."

Drawing any sort of comparison between Bush and the Roosevelts strikes some presidential historians as off-base, but on one score, at least, even Bush's critics credit him with a level of political pragmatism that keeps him in the game. Take the failed initiative to partially privatize Social Security. While conservative columnists scolded Bush for taking his top domestic priority of 2005 and reducing it to a call for a bipartisan commission on entitlements, other analysts say he was just being realistic.

"He's going to go back and try pushing his Social Security idea again?" asks historian Robert Dallek. "It won't go anywhere. It was a political blunder."

Another factor that may hurt Bush somewhat in the eyes of conservatives is the memory of Reagan, which grows more positive as time passes. Even though Reagan never actually succeeded in shrinking the federal government, his campaign against big government delighted libertarians and fiscal hawks, who now complain that Bush has abandoned that legacy. Federal spending leaped 35 percent during Bush's first term, the Cato Institute notes.

"We hoped [Bush] would be more like Reagan than his father, but clearly he is not like Ronald Reagan," says Viguerie. "Reagan was no pure conservative - he wandered off the conservative reservation here and there. But there was such a massive reservoir of goodwill for Reagan, because he was one of us. He walked with us and came to our meetings and receptions and dinners and sat with us."

Mr Jorge Bush, Why did you made us oil addicts? Are you an oil dealer? be careful with Cheney. He might not appreciate this comment.

Correct me if im wrong but....

One, that survey they mentioned also gave Bush a D/F on immigration and I don't see it in the article.

Two, comparing George Bush Jr. to Teddy Roosevelt is a complete insult to Teddy.

I know about Teddy Roosevelt and you sir are no Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy Roosevelt would seal that border, start the deportations, and start trust busting GW's big business pals in a heartbeat.

W

I saw a program on Teddy Roosevelt. The Republican Party powers tried to corral him by making him the Vice Presidential nominee. They didn't like his "progressive" tendencies (like trust busting), so making him VP basically made him powerless. But then the President was shot (forgot his name) and TR becomes President! The Party leaders are besides themselves! TR is not doing what they want, but what the people want!

So in this case anyway, it seems an assassin did us a favor.

Well, I think by now most of you know how disappointed and appalled I am as a Republican with this President, thus I donned him the Wackident.

He is a total fruitcake taking our country to third world standards every day he remains in office running up debts 4 generations from now will not even be able to make the interest payments on let alone touch the principal creating enemies where we had none and putting US at greater risk than at any time in our history of full-fledged war with US as the enemy.

His 37 "free trade" agreements that will start kicking in this year and early next are going to suck millions of good jobs out of the country and allow millions of immigrants to pour in.

We are being sucked down the sewer economically and politically as mathematically certain as 2 + 2 = 4.

What to do:

1. Get Ready to Ride the Dive To The Bottom.

2. Remove Him and Cheney From Office Immediately.

Whichever you prefer.

There's only 2 choices.

Oooh and BTW to the question:

"Is Bush still one of US?"

This TRAITOR was never one of US.

He was very good at pulling the wool over most of American's eyes that is for sure. I'm sure he hoped to keep it there until the country was a third world dictatership. Thank God more and more Americans are waking up to what he planned.

If you shaved GWB head would you find 666?

Originally Posted by ohflyingone

If you shaved GWB head would you find 666?

Isn't that the number for the Anti-Christ?

Conservatives ask: Is Bush still one of us?

Bush was never one of us? If you have to ask, you need to get your head examined.

Robert Novak reported private concern among congressional conservatives that Mr. Bush was moving toward bigger government.

Moving? He's already there. His NCLB, Prescription drug bill and his 38 not so free trade pacts alone have greatly expanded the size of government. His NSA spying has expanded the size of government. Bush has expanded the size of government more so then any Democrat can hope and dream of. Where have you guys been?

George Will called Bush's most memorable line - that America is addicted to oil - "wonderfully useless."

A useless quote from a useless idiot. What can I say? Bush and his minions are more addicted to cheap labor then we ever could be addicted to oil.

"He's conservative by temperament; many of his policy positions, such as cutting taxes, are on the right side of the political spectrum," says John Green, a political scientist at the University of Akron in Ohio. "But he doesn't have a consistent set of conservative principles. That's what a lot of the complaint has been about, especially after the State of the Union."

Bush is not a conservative at all, wake the hell up. Cutting taxes for your big business cronies doesn't make you a conservative. I would even go as far as to say he's an American in name only. What principals does Bush have that make him a conservative? Is it on spending? No. Is it on national security? No. Is it on the economy? No. Is it on education? No. Is it on our borders? No. Is he limiting the size of our overbloated government? Hell No. So where is his conservative values at?

Columnists, of course, aren't usually running for election, or trying to protect their party's slim majority in Congress, as Bush is doing. And they often don't represent the views of rank-and-file voters. A Gallup poll of State of the Union watchers, two-thirds of whom were Republicans, showed a 75 percent positive rating, including 48 percent who were "very" positive.

I wonder how many of these so called Republicans who voted in this poll were illegal aliens. Come on, nobody i've talked to has had any nice things to say about Bush's speech at all. Everyone I've talked to thought the speech was a joke. Just interacting with people alone tells me this statement is false.

A recent online poll by Mr. Viguerie of more than 1,000 conservative activists found that 67 percent say Bush is not governing as a conservative, and 64 percent give him a D or an F on government spending.

Of course no mention of immigration.

"Bush is actually a mixture of FDR [Franklin Delano Roosevelt] and TR [Teddy Roosevelt], with FDR's cool optimism and TR's pugnacity and determination."

LMAO. By far the most idiotic statement in this article. To even compare this clown to the Roosevelts is a slap in the face to the Roosevelts and to the presidency in general. How can you compare the two? If you want a real comparasion, Bush is really a mixture of Jimmy Carter and Lydon Johnson.

"He's going to go back and try pushing his Social Security idea again?" asks historian Robert Dallek. "It won't go anywhere. It was a political blunder."

Bush can try and Congress will laugh his sorry arse right back to the Dark House.

I know about Teddy Roosevelt and you sir are no Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy Roosevelt would seal that border, start the deportations, and start trust busting GW's big business pals in a heartbeat.

You sir William are dead on. What I wouldn't give to see that happen too.

Isn't that the number for the Anti-Christ?

Yep!