Comments on: Readers Respond

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:28:46 +0000

sinz54, Hoping Obama’s plan will revive the economy is like hoping bloodletting will help a hemophiliac. As to your charge of nativism – I find it strange. How many folks from ONE other country can we admit before it is proper to object? And any strategy to gain Hispanic voters for the GOP is absurd. The ones who are citizens already and well assimilated (comparatively) vote only 35% R 65% D. The newer immigrants are not as educated and are economic refugees. These people tend to fall prey to demagoguery and racial arguments, victimhood propaganda and simplistic government give-away promises, all favoring Democrats. It won’t matter to them that Republicans signed the law granting them citizenship. Not one bit.

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:07:46 +0000

Chekote: The Bush immigration bill was a VERY tough bill–tougher than any bill you’re likely to see from Obama. The illegal aliens were NOT “getting a pass.” The Bush Administration insisted (over vehement liberal objections) on a “touchback” provision–heads of households had to *go back* to their home country (say Mexico) and apply for a green card from there. They would also have to pay back taxes owed, pay a $2,000 fine, and demonstrate proficiency in English. Yes, these illegal aliens committed a crime; but with all these hoops to jump through, they would have paid their debt to society. As for Obama, I thought I made it clear that I do not embrace Obama’s policies. But if Obama can end the recession and revive the U.S. economy, I will certainly embrace the end result.

By: Chekote

Chekote — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:07:42 +0000

“But I am not that cynical. I am an American first and a conservative second.” You are an American but you are no conservative. Embracing liberal/progressive policies as long as they “work” does not make a conservative sir. Embracing the idea that government should be solving every problem is not conservative. You are a “we the government” guy and conservatives are “we the people”. Also, I did not support the Bush “immigration” bill. I am and Italian immigrant and my husband is an Hispanic immigrant. We came here legally and resent the heck out of people that show no respect for our country’s laws. I am sick and tired of people getting a pass on bad behavior just because is ‘too hard to enforce laws” or “we may lose elections” or “it is divisive”. Well, the rule of law is part of what made this country great. I may be divisive but others are being destructive. We cannot continue the practice of rewarding bad behavior and expect no consequences. Compassionate Conservatism was about expanding the federal government. THAT IS NOT A CONSEVATIVE POLICY.

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:57:48 +0000

Chekote: Rove’s plan for a permanent Republican majority might well have worked, if Bush hadn’t gotten us into an Iraq quagmire, and if the nativist loons in the GOP base hadn’t risen up against the idea of the GOP welcoming Hispanic immigrants to America. Rove’s plan depended on building upon Bush’s popularity with Hispanics (Bush was able to pull some 40% of the Hispanic vote). Dividing the Hispanic vote evenly with the Dems would have ensured a GOP lock on the Southwest. But when the immigration bill came up for a vote, Bush and Rove were stunned at the response from their own base. The GOP is now back to being the Older White Protestant Heterosexual Party. But that wasn’t Rove’s doing. It was the doing of Tancredo and Michelle Malkin. And this is why I say that the GOP doesn’t just have a problem with the agenda of the Religious Right. It also has a BIG problem with the agenda of the nativists: Tancredo, Malkin, Mark Krikorian, all of them. They are fighting a lost cause–the cause of White Protestant privilege.

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:51:15 +0000

Chekote: I’ll keep saying it: Obama is doing a lot of things. The one thing of his that I do support, is his attempts to revive the U.S. economy. I do *not* agree with how he is doing it. But I have to hope he succeeds. Otherwise, the U.S. economy will remain mired in a deep recession, possibly a depression, for years to come. Perhaps you are looking forward to that, hoping that the public will become disgusted with the Obama administration and vote the GOP back into power? But I am not that cynical. I am an American first and a conservative second. If Obama can revive the U.S. economy, then I will cheer. We can have a debate on the rest of his agenda, much of which is dubious. But NO ONE should hope for America to suffer just to win elections. I didn’t like it when Moveon.org was playing that game with the Iraq War, and I don’t like it now that Republicans are playing that game with the economy.

By: EMW150

EMW150 — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 21:49:36 +0000

Sinz54, there is a ton of critisism of Bush out there among Conservatives and there has been for some time. I’ve heard Mark Levin for example hammer away daily when Bush was out of line with Conservative principles. Where they may have not “broken” with him, they were very critical. Many backed him heavily on the war in Iraq rightfully so in my mind so maybe went easier on him on other fronts. The appalling aproval rating we saw toward the end of his administration showed though, he already had no Dem support and then he lost his base through acting away from his principles.

By: Chekote

Chekote — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:22:27 +0000

Sinz. I want Obama to fail in implementing his agenda. I believe it will hurt the country if he succeeds. That was Rush’s point. Today, I have attended a meeting with a Republican club I am a member of. A few of us think that the Republican Party needs to push for a federalist approach when it comes to social issues. Let the states decide per the 10th Amendment. So now we are trying to figure out ways to push this approach. I just wish Frum would focus on this instead of global warming or some of the other non-issues he keeps pushing.

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:09:53 +0000

Chekote: Again, I don’t think Frum would have taken on Limbaugh, if Limbaugh hadn’t said that he hopes that President Obama’s entire agenda fails. It was that specific statement that Frum pounced on. We’ve gone over that a hundred times already, and we’re just not going to agree on that–so let’s just agree to disagree. Before taking on the Human Life Amendment, I believe a simpler and easier symbolic move would be to take on the issue of embryonic stem-cell research. Unlike abortion, which splits the country down the middle, a clear majority is in favor of stem-cell research. Even conservatives like Nancy Reagan and Orrin Hatch are in favor. Unlike abortion, the SoCons lost that argument years ago, when in-vitro fertilization (IVF) became practical and widespread. It’s IVF that creates tens of thousands of frozen embryos that will never be implanted and eventually die anyway. That would be happening even if stem-cell research did not exist. So if these embryos are dying anyway, why not extract stem cells from them to preserve the lives of others? While simultaneously guaranteeing that no embryos will ever be created expressly for this purpose? On the issue of embryonic stem-cell research, the SoCons are more out of touch with a clear majority of Americans than any other. So let’s press them on it, and force them to compromise on it in the GOP platform.

By: Chekote

Chekote — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:05:09 +0000

“we have seen what conservatism is about: It is about shifting as much of the burden for the cost of society as possible onto the poor;” How exactly have the conservatives done that when the poor pay no income taxes? Actually, they get money back from the IRS in the form of a EIC even though they don’t pay a penny of income taxes. So, again, I ask how are the poor picking up the tab as you say?

By: Chekote

Chekote — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:03:04 +0000

petty. Frum is advocating the very policies pushed by Rove. You know, compassionate conservativsm. You know, the policies that were supposed to establish a governing Republican majority. When this site first appeared I was happy thinking that it would be a vehicle to push the Republican Party adopting federalism as envisioned in our founding documents. Instead, it seems to me that Frum – when not obsessing about Rush, Levin, Coulter – wants to enlarge the federal government as much as the Democrats only he wants to do it differently.