.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Rantings of a Sandmonkey

Be forewarned: The writer of this blog is an extremely cynical, snarky, pro-US, secular, libertarian, disgruntled sandmonkey. If this is your cup of tea, please enjoy your stay here. If not, please sod off

Thursday, October 27, 2005

Is Bush destroying the conservative movement?

The writer of this article thinks so. It's pretty much doom and gloom stuff on how the republican voters may just sit down the next election to punish Bush for his anti- conservative leadership. For the liberal leaders who are like "WTF are you people talking about?", here is why Bush isn't a true conservative: With a single stroke…the president has…widened the fissures within the conservative movement. That's not a bad day's work -- for liberals. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq aside, George W. Bush has not governed as a conservative (amnesty for illegal immigrants, reckless spending that will ultimately undo his tax cuts, signing a campaign finance bill even while maintaining its unconstitutionality). This George Bush, like his father, is showing himself to be indifferent, if not actively hostile, to conservative values. Not to mention the Harriet Miers nomination, which is really pissing the republican base off. The writer warns that republican voters may just sit out the 2006 elections to punish Bush and the party. This may lead to some negative consequences. But the “persuasive act” may be one of severe consequences. If conservatives opt to stay home next November, then Democrats -- who even now openly gloat over their electoral prospects -- will capture seats in both chambers of Congress. More importantly, Democrats will unquestionably seize the momentum going into the 2008 presidential election. This may seem like good news for democrats, but not really. The reason why people will vote for them will have more to do with their dislike of Bush's presidency and not affinity to their ideas (an area in which they are found lacking). All it would take to swing the vote back to the republicans is if their politicians convinced them that they will have the discipline to act truly conservative. The same can not be said for the democrats unfortunately, and the "vote for us because we are not Bush" strategy they seem to be following will not work past 2006. The democrats need to find a vision first, while the republicans just need to follow the one they have.

3 Comments:

At 10/27/2005 04:19:00 AM, Blogger TB said...

I don't know about how the democrats would fare in 2008, but even if you're a republican you should wish for a democratic win in 2006. The reason is, the republicans are becoming so power-corrupt that it is ruining their reputation for being fiscaly responsible and prudent. A democratic senate would provide some balance, and possibly remotivate the the republicans by reminding them how hard it will be for them to have a democratic senate once again.

 
At 10/27/2005 05:00:00 AM, Blogger The Sandmonkey said...

TB,

We may have something in common here. I am a libertarian, so I usually lean more towards republicans than democrats when it comes to who gets to be in charge. However, for some reason, republicans are better hwnever there is a good opposition from the democrats. The democrats have been losing power for the past what, 6 years? If they get to win enough seats the enxt election, it maybe the wake-up call the republicans in the senate need to start acting right. you know?

 
At 10/27/2005 07:48:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

With the announcement of the Miers withdraw the base should be lot happier. The corruption is something made up by the press who is decidely towing the DNC line. AS a Republican there is no way I'll sit out an election and no way I will ever vote for a Democrat. I think this is all way overblown.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home