The Conservative Case Against George W. Bush

[sMiLeYz]

What a true conservative think of George W. Bush. I don't agree with everything this man says, but hes almost right on the money about the shortcomings of George W. Bush.

But this president deserves to be criticized. Sharply. By anyone who believes in limited, constitutional government.

First, George W. Bush, despite laudable personal and family characteristics, is remarkably incurious and ill read. Gut instincts can carry even a gifted politician only so far. And a lack of knowledge leaves him vulnerable to simplistic remedies to complex problems, especially when it comes to turning America into the globe?s governess.

Second, despite occasional exceptions, the Bush administration, backed by the Republican-controlled Congress, has been promoting larger government at almost every turn. Its spending policies have been irresponsible, and its trade strategies have been destructive. The president has been quite willing to sell out the national interest for perceived political gain, whether the votes sought are from seniors or farmers. The terrorist attacks of 9/11 encouraged the administration to push into law civil-liberties restrictions that should worry anyone, whether they are wielded by a Bush or a Clinton administration.

The tendency to hate, really hate, opposing politicians surely is not good for American democracy. It is not rational to hate George W. Bush, just as it was not rational to hate Bill Clinton. But after spending eight years hating Clinton, conservatives who complain about the Bush-haters appear to be hypocrites.

... only appear to be hypocrites, Doug?

If anyone doubts this guy's dittohead credientials...
Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute and a former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan aka CkG's ideological hero.
The American Conservative magazine title piece

 

[Insane3D]

Another prominent conservative, George F. Will, had some not so nice things to say in Newsweek either..

Conservatism, Um, Evolving

Congressional Republicans must assume they will never be in the minority and vulnerable to payback. They are mistaken.

Dec. 8 issue - By the time the conservatives running Congress and this conservative president are done doing what they think will win the next election, tweezers may be needed to pick up the remnants of conservatism as traditionally understood. Time was, Republicans disdained the political formula supposedly voiced by FDR?s aide Harry Hopkins: ?Tax and tax, spend and spend, elect and elect.? Now Republicans have amended the formula with an audacity that would make the most ardent New Dealer blush.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Who needs principles when you are in the majority? Crappy leadership by Demoncrats has been replaced with crappy leadership by Repugnicans. I blame Bill Clinton. As a marginally left of center Democrat he co-opted several GOP issues (Republicans will claim welfare reform and fiscal restraint . . . but they currently supply welfare to Boeing, MCI, etc . . . not to mention the total absence of budgetary discipline). Instead of trying to recover the high ground on core GOP issues, the Party has embraced Big Government and pork barrel politics on par with the Democratic excess of the distant (and recent) past. Of course, true to form they cut taxes as well . . . effectively saddling future generations with current balance debt PLUS increased entitlement liabilities.

Fiscal conservatives no longer have a party in America.

 

[Jhhnn]

About time some honest conservatives started to wake up, realize that the current Republican leaders are not conservatives at all, but rather radical reactionaries. They epitomize the greed and cronyism of the McKinley and Taft eras, when govt giveaways to the financial elite were de rigeur, anybody not muscling their way to the trough regarded as weaklings...

 

[Moonbeam]

George Bush is a unique combination of everything wrong with Republicans and everything wrong with Democrats and everything wrong about America. He is a living breathing disaster.

 

[sMiLeYz]

Where are the so-called "conservatives"? I'd like to hear their thoughts.

 

[Pennstate]

I don't think there are ANY true conservatives on this board. In fact, I think I believe in more conservative ideals than most of the Republicans on this board.

 

[chess9]

SmilYz:

They are hiding and don't want you to mention this subject again. They don't have a player in the White House and none poised to oppose Bush next year.

The neocons have given the Democrats an enormous bludgeon to pound them over the head with in the coming election. The first time a neocon says "tax and spend Democrats" the pounding will begin. I'd be happy normally for their stupidity but the dumb b+++++++ are spending my money like drunken sailors!

-Robert

 

[sMiLeYz]

Originally posted by: Pennstate
I don't think there are ANY true conservatives on this board. In fact, I think I believe in more conservative ideals than most of the Republicans on this board.

There may not be any true conservatives, but there sure are alot of partisans.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz

Originally posted by: Pennstate
I don't think there are ANY true conservatives on this board. In fact, I think I believe in more conservative ideals than most of the Republicans on this board.

There may not be any true conservatives, but there sure are alot of partisans.

If by "true" he means "pure," then he must know that that's a bygone era.

And I say without prejudice that these two quoted men are from a bygone era. State's right is a thing of the past. Federalism has been encroaching on it since this country was founded. There is absolute no turning back the clock. The world is getting more consolidated and those that work for the Federal gov't (Presidents, senators, representatives, supreme court, etc...) aren't going to commit political suicide by transfering some of their powers back to the state. that will never happen. Republicans can harp all they want about states' right, but it's nothing more than a grand illusion. Once they get onto the national stage, the attrition of state's right is the name of the game.

It's inevitable.

EDIT: Of course, you had our early politicians talk about this. But that's all they did, talk.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Dari
If by "true" he means "pure," then he must know that that's a bygone era.

And I say without prejudice that these two quoted men are from a bygone era. State's right is a thing of the past. Federalism has been encroaching on it since this country was founded. There is absolute no turning back the clock. The world is getting more consolidated and those that work for the Federal gov't (Presidents, senators, representatives, supreme court, etc...) aren't going to commit political suicide by transfering some of their powers back to the state. that will never happen. Republicans can harp all they want about states' right, but it's nothing more than a grand illusion. Once they get onto the national stage, the attrition of state's right is the name of the game.

It's inevitable.

EDIT: Of course, you had our early politicians talk about this. But that's all they did, talk.

Sorry Dari, can you show me where either of these articles even mentions States' rights? While these two conservatives are critical of Bush and the Republicans for many things, States' rights isn't one of them.

BTW sMiLeYz and Insane3D, great articles. There may be hope for the Republican party yet.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Dari
If by "true" he means "pure," then he must know that that's a bygone era.

And I say without prejudice that these two quoted men are from a bygone era. State's right is a thing of the past. Federalism has been encroaching on it since this country was founded. There is absolute no turning back the clock. The world is getting more consolidated and those that work for the Federal gov't (Presidents, senators, representatives, supreme court, etc...) aren't going to commit political suicide by transfering some of their powers back to the state. that will never happen. Republicans can harp all they want about states' right, but it's nothing more than a grand illusion. Once they get onto the national stage, the attrition of state's right is the name of the game.

It's inevitable.

EDIT: Of course, you had our early politicians talk about this. But that's all they did, talk.

Sorry Dari, can you show me where either of these articles even mentions States' rights? While these two conservatives are critical of Bush and the Republicans for many things, States' rights isn't one of them.

BTW sMiLeYz and Insane3D, great articles. There may be hope for the Republican party yet.

In the first article, the author talked about larger government, i.e. more federal power. That is what most conservatives refer to when they complain about bigger gov't.

 

[Insane3D]

I blame the french...

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Who needs principles when you are in the majority? Crappy leadership by Demoncrats has been replaced with crappy leadership by Repugnicans. I blame Bill Clinton. As a marginally left of center Democrat he co-opted several GOP issues (Republicans will claim welfare reform and fiscal restraint . . . but they currently supply welfare to Boeing, MCI, etc . . . not to mention the total absence of budgetary discipline). Instead of trying to recover the high ground on core GOP issues, the Party has embraced Big Government and pork barrel politics on par with the Democratic excess of the distant (and recent) past. Of course, true to form they cut taxes as well . . . effectively saddling future generations with current balance debt PLUS increased entitlement liabilities.

Fiscal conservatives no longer have a party in America.

Yes they do. It's called the Libertarian Party.

http://www.lp.org

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: Pennstate
I don't think there are ANY true conservatives on this board. In fact, I think I believe in more conservative ideals than most of the Republicans on this board.

Alan Keyes was my pick for president last election.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: chess9
SmilYz:

They are hiding and don't want you to mention this subject again. They don't have a player in the White House and none poised to oppose Bush next year.

The neocons have given the Democrats an enormous bludgeon to pound them over the head with in the coming election. The first time a neocon says "tax and spend Democrats" the pounding will begin. I'd be happy normally for their stupidity but the dumb b+++++++ are spending my money like drunken sailors!

-Robert

Right, but the wannabe Conservo-Republicans on this board will inevitably vote for Bush (again) in 2004, because they couldn't possibly choke back the vomit long enough to vote democratic. Even though Dean is more of a fiscal conservative than Bush will ever be. Plus they get the added bonus that Bush likes to blow stuff up.

"Borrow and spend Republicans" should be the opposition's chant in 2004. Even the morons at the state level (Ahnuld, I'm looking at you) have apparantly learned a stupid new trick.

 

[Pennstate]

Dari,

If "true conservatism" is of the past, what ideals do the current conservative movement believe in??? Do they believe in just Winning reelections?

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Today's conservative is yesterday's liberal.

 

[Ferocious]

The government today appears to actually be outgrowing the economy!

At least that's what I read somewere.

Bush is about as conservative (in the true sense) as Stalin was.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Ferocious
The government today appears to actually be outgrowing the economy!

At least that's what I read somewere.

Bush is about as conservative (in the true sense) as Stalin was.

That's the new America the AT experts here love so much. A huge Marshall Law Nanny Government with everyone happy with their $8.50 hr Wal;-Mart jobs. Get used to it.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Ferocious
The government today appears to actually be outgrowing the economy!

At least that's what I read somewere.

Bush is about as conservative (in the true sense) as Stalin was.

That's the new America the AT experts here love so much. A huge Marshall Law Nanny Government with everyone happy with their $8.50 hr Wal;-Mart jobs. Get used to it.

dmcowen674 translation: The sky is falling, the sky is falling!

 

[kandarp]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Ferocious
The government today appears to actually be outgrowing the economy!

At least that's what I read somewere.

Bush is about as conservative (in the true sense) as Stalin was.

That's the new America the AT experts here love so much. A huge Marshall Law Nanny Government with everyone happy with their $8.50 hr Wal;-Mart jobs. Get used to it.

dmcowen674 translation: The sky is falling, the sky is falling!

personally i am waiting for Big Brother and the Thought Police, I always knew George Orwell was right

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Pennstate
Dari,

If "true conservatism" is of the past, what ideals do the current conservative movement believe in??? Do they believe in just Winning reelections?

The current conservative movement is on the fringe of American society. They are definitely not with the business-class. In fact, to find a "true conservative," one should look no further than the state militias and their politicos scrubbing the base of the political hierachy..

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Pennstate
Dari,

If "true conservatism" is of the past, what ideals do the current conservative movement believe in??? Do they believe in just Winning reelections?

Yes.