There is no breakup of the Conservative Movement within the Republican Party. There is a fight within the Republican Party.
Like so many other Conservative Republicans today, I am so very tired of expending time, and energy, to fight for conservative positions and have those positions placed in jeopardy by the man who is supposed to be the leader of the party. That is why we, the Conservative Republicans, feel betrayed.
I have said before I am not a "Compassionate Conservative". What I am is… a Social Conservative, and, a Fiscal Conservative… and just for good measure you may hang “paleo” on to the front of Conservative.
I am also a realist. And some would say an ideologue. The latter may well be true. I find myself in the company of a few million like-minded Republicans in this country of ours. And we are furious. The fury has not subsided… not one whit, since the President made known his nomination of Harriet Miers to be the next Supreme Court Justice.
I have asked the President to withdraw her name. I have asked Ms. Miers to withdraw her name. I have asked my Senators to vote no on confirming her and I have written every Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee and asked them to vote no on recommending her to the full Senate for a confirmation vote.
How this will all play out, I have no idea. I lay claim to no special knowledge on the inside game in Washington. But some things seem abundantly clear. First, the president will not withdraw her name. There is a "slim to none" chance that Ms. Miers will withdraw her name... or ask the President to withdraw it. There is no chance that we will learn anything productive, or revealing, from the Senate Judiciary hearings. And finally, judging from the stunning weakness the Senate Republicans have demonstrated so often in the recent past, I have no expectation they will do anything other than vote to confirm Ms. Miers.
In future, we “Conservative” Republicans should be suspicious of a Republican Candidate for President who would seek to dilute the word “Conservative” in any way. “Compassionate Conservative” apparently means “Liberal” Republican. At least that is the way it appears. The President’s track record of enlarging government and spending money like a "drunken Democrat" does nothing but underscore that understanding.
I would remind the President, as others in the blogoshere have done, that his father lost his second term because he did not listen to the conservatives in the Republican Party. Had he listened, he would have understood that when he said “No new taxes” we believed him. When he raised taxes anyway, we felt lied to and... we abandoned him. Now, George, the second, has, it seems, done the same thing. We will abandon him, too.
Unlike Democrats we Conservatives have ideals and ideas. We know that those ideas have consequences. Add to that formula, reason, and you have a party platform we do not have to apologize for… to anyone. One doesn’t need to lay claim to the word “compassionate” as a Conservative.
We have come to a parting of the ways in the Republican Party. We must now be about the business of replacing the “RINOS” and the “Compassionate Conservatives” remaining within our ranks.
Call it a purge if you will. If that’s what it takes to reclaim our party, then so be it. 2006 is fast approaching and we have work to do. Let’s be about it!
“Longstreet”
What a load of BS. You knew perfectly well what "compassionate conservative" meant back in 2000. You willingly ignored it because you wanted to defeat Al Gore.
ReplyDeleteTo come back and act as if you've only just now realized that Bush wasn't a real conservative is either outright dishonesty or it underscores just how tightly afixed your blinders are. Either way you have nobody to blame but yourself.
Bush is not a conservative? Wher in the heck did that come from? He sure a hell isn't Liberal. Liberals do good for the middle class. They are pro-union, and a real liberal would never have appointed people to run Fema as a political favor instead of capable person in charge. A liberal would never have created Dept. of Homeland Security which is only capable of spying on American citizens. Never would have tried to take over the CPB. Never would have allowed Isrealy soldiers, or facist Black Water-military flunkies t do security in Louisiana, never sent our troops into harms way over a lie, and oh yeah A LIBERAL would never have been APPOINTED president by the supreme court nor would aLiberal have FIXED an election! Conservative are the enemy of a free society!
ReplyDeletecompasionate conservative=friendly facist
ReplyDeleteTo follow your line of thinking...LBJ was not a Liberal. He began a war with the "War of Tonkin Resolution" which was based on a bald-faced lie!
ReplyDelete...And JFK would have lost to Nixon had his father not bought the votes he needed in Illinois.
Bill Clinton would not have appoined J.L. Witt to head-up Fema....
Sir, your knowledge of US History is sorely lacking. Just off hand, I'd say you must be a product of the Public School System! For the propaganda you regurgitate comes straight from their Politcally Correct text books.
NIXON lost to Kennedy because he looked like the troll that is was on tv! It had nothing to do with buying votes, that is right wing B.S. In the Gulf of Tonkin to which I believe you are refurring sir, was when, On August 2, while the USS Maddox was not far from Hon Me, a North Vietnamese island being attacked, three North Vietnamese torpedo boats chased the Maddox off. The attack was unsuccessful, although torpedoes were launched. The USS Maddox was hit by one heavy machine gun shell from the torpedo boats. This is referred to as the "First Attack". IRAQ in now way attacked us or ever would have. J.L. Witt was qualified talk to people who were in FEMA. Clinton funded FEMA sufficiently and made the head of FEMA a cabinet level position. Bush took money from FEMA to buy bomb-disabling robots under Dept. of Homeland Security for Wyoming. I am a product of Private schooling thank you, and also I am also a desciple of the truth, and not a religious, but a Spiritual person, If a true spiritual person ran for office instead of a religious nut job the evangelicals would be in real trouble!
ReplyDelete