Bush: Big Disappointment!

I’ve got a powerful ache in my gut. My unease with President Bush and his policies that I’ve been denying for some time, has crashed to my consciousness. It started yesterday when I listened to Rush Limbaugh. He was talking about the President throwing out the conservatives over the immigration bill. Essentially, Bush was breaking with his base. Then that unease gave way to sickness as I read Peggy Noonan’s column, Too Bad – President Bush has torn the conservative coalition asunder.

For almost three years, arguably longer, conservative Bush supporters have felt like sufferers of battered wife syndrome. You don’t like endless gushing spending, the kind that assumes a high and unstoppable affluence will always exist, and the tax receipts will always flow in? Too bad! You don’t like expanding governmental authority and power? Too bad. You think the war was wrong or is wrong? Too bad.But on immigration it has changed from “Too bad” to “You’re bad.”

It started early in his first term when Bush didn’t take up a thorough cleaning house of the Clintons and all their followers. Not following up on all the scandals was a major disappointment and could lead to Hillary Clinton winning the presidency, a woman who should have been discredited as one of our smartest women. Buddying up to Ted Kennedy was was a big disappointment. Not shutting down the government spending machine or not using a veto on spending bills was a disappointment. The contrast between the conduct of Gulf War one and the inept conduct of Gulf War two was a huge disappointment. Stacking the administration with Goldman Sachs execs boggles my mind. Now we have the administration shoving an immigration bill down our throats is the last straw.

Noonan writes,

Bush the younger came forward, presented himself as a conservative, garnered all the frustrated hopes of his party, turned them into victory, and not nine months later was handed a historical trauma that left his country rallied around him, lifting him, and his party bonded to him. He was disciplined and often daring, but in time he sundered the party that rallied to him, and broke his coalition into pieces. He threw away his inheritance. I do not understand such squandering.

Who in the Republican party stands for limited government? Only one man, Ron Paul that’s who, and we need to work our butts off to get him elected. We will have to work our butts off for conservative ideas.

Peggy Noonan
href=”http://technorati.com/tag/Bush” rel=”tag”>Bush


Here’s Dale Hurd at CBN echoing my comments:

For me, the “canary in the mineshaft” of the Bush administration died at 12:00AM this morning, when the Wall Street Journal posted a piece about the President’s unpopular immigration bill by former Reagan speechwriter and influential Republican Peggy Noonan.

5 Responses to “Bush: Big Disappointment!”

  1. I’m not trying to be mean here, but this is a key difference between liberals and conservatives. I’m a liberal, and I have no problem breaking with my party when they’re wrong.

    Let’s face it, neither party is right 100% of thew time. Following party lines is worse than dumb. It’s downright unpatriotic.

    To heck with your party and politics. Follow your heart in regards to right or wrong for your country.

    Bush has been wrong for years. He’s been growing the size of government since shortly after he took office. He’s not just a bad conservative, he’s a bad man. Period. If it weren’t for partisan politics, conservatives would have realized this years ago.

    P.S. I agree with you that Ron Paul is the true conservative among the republican contenders for the presidency. I don’t agree with him, obviously (I’m a liberal), but he seems like not only a good man but an honest man as well. I definitely respect that.

    P.S. Nice blog!

  2. That’s right Mike – blame Clinton. “That is a typical liberal Republican ad hominum attack and demeans your analysis”.

  3. My latin is rusty it should have been ad hominem. An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: “argument to the person”, “argument against the man”) consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.

    I did not blame the Clintons for anything. There were in my opinion many problems with the Clinton administration that did not but should have been resolved. Bush chose to put that all behind him, after all he had a reputation in Texas of working with Democrats. He also should have cleaned house of Clinton appointees and put his own men in. Tenet and Clark come to mind.

    You overlook the larger point of my post. There were many things Bush did that infuriated his base, but we thought it was all a strategy to advance our policies. And there we were wrong.

  4. I’ll take your word on the Latin, I got A’s in Latin 40+ years ago but haven’t had much contact with it since. As to blaming Clinton don’t forget that Tenet was a suggestion from Orin Hatch as someone who could be approved and Clark – he was a carry over from Bush I. The fact that you even mentioned Clinton is “ad hominem”, a name that always comes up when the Republicans are under attack. I may be an aging hippie but I’m not a Democrat. I’m glad to see you support Ron Paul. I may not agree with him on everything but he is one hell of a lot better than anything I see in the Republican party today. I guess my question is did you see the light after everything GWB touched turned into a disaster? That’s what I see in Noonan’s commentary. Even Ed Morrissey saw the hypocrisy of Noonam today.

  5. Not everybody agrees with the Captain’s assessment of Noonan.

    He says:

    They’ve not had to answer substantial conservative criticism very often. When they have, though, they’ve been consistent. When the Right objected to the poor choice of Harriet Miers as a Supreme Court nominee, they were accused of being sexist. When the Dubai Ports deal came to light — which the administration failed to properly support — they accused critics of bigotry and xenophobia. Those same accusations have arisen from Bush himself in this debate, with his accusation that opponents of the compromise bill “do not want what’s right for America”


    Noonan says,

    What President Bush is doing, and has been doing for some time, is sundering a great political coalition.

    Maybe the Bush’s immigration comments were the last straw, the tipping point.

    When did I see the light? My light is on a dimmer switch and it has been gradually getting brighter, Noonan’s column written by one who I respect, totally flipped my switch. (No pun intended!)

Discussion Area - Leave a Comment