How Dubya conned the conservatives

[techweenie]

Interesting, but only the latest in a long series of people belatedly waking up...

Bush's Base Betrayal

By Richard A. Viguerie
Sunday, May 21, 2006; B01

As a candidate in 2000, George W. Bush was a Rorschach test. Country Club Republicans saw him as another George H.W. Bush; some conservatives, thinking wishfully, saw him as another Ronald Reagan. He called himself a "compassionate conservative," which meant whatever one wanted it to mean. Experts from across the party's spectrum were flown to Austin to brief Bush and reported back: "He's one of us."

Republicans were desperate to retake the White House, conservatives were desperate to get the Clinton liberals out and there was no direct heir to Reagan running for president. So most conservatives supported Bush as the strongest candidate -- some enthusiastically and some, like me, reluctantly. After the disastrous presidency of his father, our support for the son was a triumph of hope over experience.

Once he took office, conservatives were willing to grant this Bush a honeymoon. We were happy when he proposed tax cuts (small, but tax cuts nonetheless) and when he pushed for a missile defense system. Then came the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and conservatives came to see support for the president as an act of patriotism.

Conservatives tolerated the No Child Left Behind Act, an extensive intrusion into state and local education, and the budget-busting Medicare prescription drug benefit. They tolerated the greatest increase in spending since Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society. They tolerated Bush's failure to veto a single bill, and his refusal to enforce immigration laws. They even tolerated his signing of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance overhaul, even though Bush's opposition to that measure was a key reason they backed him over Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) in the 2000 primaries.

In 2004, Republican leaders pleaded with conservatives -- particularly religious conservatives -- to register people to vote and help them turn out on Election Day. Those efforts strengthened Republicans in Congress and probably saved the Bush presidency. We were told: Just wait till the second term. Then, the president, freed of concern over reelection and backed by a Republican Congress, would take off the gloves and fight for the conservative agenda. Just wait.

We're still waiting.

-------full editorial-------
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/19/AR2006051901770_pf.html

[lendaddy]

There's a lot of truth in that.

[Mulhollanddose]

Bush put the "con" in conservative....[/nerdy dumb joke laugh]

[HardDrive]

Read the book Imposter by Bruce Bartlett. Nothing better than a respected economist who worked for Reagan to take Georgie apart.

[mede8er]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Bush put the "con" in conservative....[/nerdy dumb joke laugh]

Actually it was Rove who drove the 'conning' of America.....

[techweenie]

Any pollster could easily find that 70-80% of Americans would like a clear cut conservative vs. liberal choice. But I doubt if we'll see anything that tidy. We had it in '64.

Current political strategies are focused on getting opinions to peak at the time of the vote, using 'wedge' and 'character' issues. Idealogies don't figure in to the equation much.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally posted by techweenie
Any pollster could easily find that 70-80% of Americans would like a clear cut conservative vs. liberal choice. But I doubt if we'll see anything that tidy. We had it in '64.

Current political strategies are focused on getting opinions to peak at the time of the vote, using 'wedge' and 'character' issues. Idealogies don't figure in to the equation much.

A big reason for my support of Bush was just that, the Dem's strategy seemed to be 100% bash Bush, without any suggestions as to how they would do things different. Not that the Bush camp didn't participate as well, but it didn't dominate their message. Any candidate that could come out and present a clear plan, then stay above the childish mud slinging, would have my vote. It's sad that our presidential races have come down to a popularity contest, the exact reason that Dole lost.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by mede8er
Actually it was Rove who drove the 'conning' of America.....

I know what the left-wing kook fringe says, it doesn't impress me. You know you are in trouble when you let those miscreants define you. This is precisely what Rove has done, what he has brought to the table (coddling Democrats and adopting their policies and style). Rove has brought liberalism to Bush and/or he has encouraged those traits in Bush. Bush will be defined by the economy and his handling of the Clinton foreign policy failures. On both of these subjects the left-wing fringe kook-o-sphere would credit no-one except Bush and his lessons from poppa.

It is hard to keep track of all the Democrat conspiracies and name calling, but I am pretty sure at least one high-end liberal think tank has offered that Bush had a vendetta, hence Iraq, and that Bush-43 wasn't going to repeat Bush-41 "no new taxes" debacle...So, which is it, Bush or Rove?...(ummm...uhhhh...which conspiracy is most important and digestible to the idiot left minions)?

You might as well have said "blah blah blah" and been more intellectually coherent.

[mede8er]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
I know what the left-wing kook fringe says, it doesn't impress me. You know you are in trouble when you let those miscreants define you. This is precisely what Rove has done, what he has brought to the table (coddling Democrats and adopting their policies and style). Rove has brought liberalism to Bush and/or he has encouraged those traits in Bush. Bush will be defined by the economy and his handling of the Clinton foreign policy failures. On both of these subjects the left-wing fringe kook-o-sphere would credit no-one except Bush and his lessons from poppa.

It is hard to keep track of all the Democrat conspiracies and name calling, but I am pretty sure at least one high-end liberal think tank has offered that Bush had a vendetta, hence Iraq, and that Bush-43 wasn't going to repeat Bush-41 "no new taxes" debacle...So, which is it, Bush or Rove?...(ummm...uhhhh...which conspiracy is most important and digestible to the idiot left minions)?

You might as well have said "blah blah blah" and been more intellectually coherent.

You might as well have said "blah blah blah" and been more intellectually coherent.

[Mulhollanddose]

[techweenie]

Originally posted by onewhippedpuppy
A big reason for my support of Bush was just that, the Dem's strategy seemed to be 100% bash Bush, without any suggestions as to how they would do things different. Not that the Bush camp didn't participate as well, but it didn't dominate their message. Any candidate that could come out and present a clear plan, then stay above the childish mud slinging, would have my vote. It's sad that our presidential races have come down to a popularity contest, the exact reason that Dole lost.

From my perspective, the RNC strategy was to slime Kerry and invoke 9/11. That always puzzled me, since Dubya had made zero effort to address terrorism in his first 8-1/2 months.

[mede8er]

Kerry ran a far too rational campaign.....

Rove understands the market force of irrationality.....

[Mulhollanddose]

Even with the media in Kerry's back-pocket, he was envisioned as an ultra liberal (voting record confirmed this) and realized as anything but militarily competent at a time that was most needed...His nutbag spoiled b2tch wife was no help whatsoever, nor was his flip-flopping, nor was his anti-military and treasonous speech before Congress.

[Mulhollanddose]

It interests me to no end that Rove is painted with horns, by Democrats, yet Howard Dean is their DNC chief...The guy makes Rove look angelic in comparison and practice...Dean is just short of a Hitler moustache.

[mede8er]

The Dems are a rudderless ship...

The Repubs created a culture of corruption which will lead to their demise...

America suffers...

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by mede8er
The Repubs created a culture of corruption which will lead to their demise...

America suffers...

Republicans a "culture of corruption"?...They may have a culture of incompetence and cowardice, but any perceived corruption is easily eclipsed by the Democrats, who interestingly coined the statement.

mede8er, can you think of any Republican indiscretion that comes close to Clinton selling out the White House to Chinese donors, in exchange for ICBM tech?

Do you know of any Republican caught with $90,000 dollars in his freezer, illegally obtained to bribe a foreign government?

[techweenie]

Originally posted by mede8er
The Dems are a rudderless ship...

The Repubs created a culture of corruption which will lead to their demise...

America suffers...

True and true.

It's too bad the system is set up to prevent a third party candidacy from succeeding.

[mede8er]

Yes...dead soldiers....

The events that lead to their deaths and the events that continue the bloodshed....