The Respectfully Republican Conversation

An Effective Conservative Response:

Bush Haters Are Fools, Don't Emulate Them

As things are shaping up, it is evident that we as conservatives must actively oppose much of the agenda of the transitioning administration.  Conservatives had no doubt that this would be the case and are ready as always with common sense solutions.  But we cannot lose track of one thing: unlike the Bush haters, we must promote our values, not just oppose theirs.  Our opposition is not to Barack Obama, it is to the harmful policies that he and his party seek to promote.

This is not to be misunderstood, by any stretch of the imagination, as an appeal to stop fighting for what we believe in.  At a time that our nation is in great economic, national security and societal peril, we must promote our needed conservative solutions with more vigor than ever before.  But it is also imperative that we go about this the right way.

An overwhelming majority of conservatives understand that we must not emulate the Bush haters.  Liberals believe in a cult of personality.  Conservatives believe in ideas.  Our support of President Bush is linked first and foremost to policy.  Likewise, our opposition to President-elect Obama is based on policy.  But for those who will soon join us as they see the harm of liberal policies and become disillusioned: your opposition to Obama must be based on the issues and on what he does.

Conservative values and solutions are a message in and of themselves.  Our efforts must be concentrated on best articulating those principles and on aptly defending them against baseless attack. 

Do not learn a lesson from the Bush haters, other than what not to do.  These were people for whom the President could do no right.  When he launched war against Saddam, after 18 months of constant warning (which were themselves preceded by over 10 years of general warning), he was accused of "cowboy diplomacy." When he allowed similar diplomacy (albeit with a real threat of force to back it up) to run its course with North Korea and Iran, he was portrayed as having cowered and Time Magazine did a cover feature, marking the "end of ‘cowboy diplomacy,'" complete with a cartoon hat and boots for full characterization. 

When hurricanes hit in 2005, even before Katrina, the left started tales of Bush ordering the seeding of clouds over urban neighborhoods.  And when Katrina hit, they pounced, proceeding to politicize a natural disaster.  It did not matter that the federal response was the fastest ever to be launched, nor that it would have been faster still had the Democratic Governor not asked for a 48 hour waiting period.  And when it was discovered that FEMA Director Brown had given the unprecedented advice to countermand the Governor's appeal and send in federal forces early, not only was he given no credit, but the President is ridiculed to this day for saying that he had performed well. 

Indeed, if President Bush were to stumble upon the cure for heart disease while reading through a medical briefing, Democrats would excoriate him for "shirking the duties of the office to play doctor." If he were to singlehandedly save a boy and his grandparents from drowning, the media would portray the entire event as "a clumsy act of playing lifeguard." Yet while the mainstream media was complicit in the societal normalization of the Bush hatred lunacy, their effect is temporary.  History will be far less kind to their methods and far more truthful.  So let no one on our side emulate these fools.  And in case anyone is wondering, doing so would not be conducive.

We must oppose appeasement of dictators, including anything being done that could strengthen the Castro regime in its final throws of power.  We must advocate a strong foreign policy to protect the homeland from terror, something that the current President has accomplished with far greater success than has any other.  We must push for a robust economy, an objective best achieved by providing targeted economic incentives for job creation, or as they're commonly referred to: "tax cuts." They're what led us away from recession in 2001 as well as what ushered in the Reagan boom. 

We must oppose anyone who tries to stand in the way of what's best for the nation and argue against those who oppose methods that have been tested and proven time and time again.  But we must not make caricatures of our opponents when engaging in serious discussion, for to do so is only to make caricatures of ourselves. 

The struggle ahead is serious and conservative values, when properly articulated, always win the day.  Let us engage in the national discussion with an approach that is respectful and loyal.  Most of all, let us do so effectively.  The future of the nation is at stake. 

By Yomin Postelnik  Sunday, November 23, 2008

Although I did not pick the title of the article, I found some good points.  And as the article so said (in different terminology) if people must disagree, we should at least agree to disagree respectfully. 

Initial Steps by Obama Suggest a Bipartisan Flair

By JEFF ZELENY Published: November 23, 2008

CHICAGO - In the third week of his transition to power, President-elect Barack Obama is working to build a cordial relationship with Republicans by seeking guidance on policy proposals, asking for advice on appointments and hoping to avoid perceptions of political arrogance given the wide margins of his victory.

Mr. Obama has made calls to Republican leaders, and he dispatched Rahm Emanuel, his new chief of staff, to meet with them on Capitol Hill. He asked Republicans to support his economic recovery plan and on Monday will name Timothy F. Geithner, who has worked with the Bush administration's team, as his choice for Treasury secretary.

And while he has yet to name any Republicans to cabinet-level positions as pledged, he is strongly considering James L. Jones for national security adviser, a retired Marine general who appeared at a campaign event with Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, earlier this year.

"I'd say, so far so good," said Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, a member of the Republican leadership team. "If he follows through on that, he'll find plenty of Republicans willing to help him."

Mr. Alexander added, "It's almost completely up to him."

Mr. Obama has shied away from inserting himself in the still-to-be resolved Senate contests in Georgia and Minnesota. While he recorded a radio advertisement for the Democratic candidate in Georgia, advisers said he would not visit there, to avoid appearing to be too political as he works to deliver on his campaign pledge to bridge the partisan divide in Washington.

The bipartisan concessions have infuriated many liberal Democrats but offer a window into how Mr. Obama hopes to approach the presidency. The criticism from the left illustrated the challenges he faces as the symbolism of reaching out to Republicans gives way to disagreements over the Iraq war, taxes and a health care overhaul, particularly considering the size of the Democratic majorities in Congress and the pressures that will bring from his own party.

Mr. Obama has sent centrist and pragmatic signals by selecting Mr. Geithner as Treasury secretary and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York as secretary of state, while offering more traditionally liberal signs by delegating the health care overhaul to Tom Daschle, a former Senate Democratic leader.

But should Mr. Obama go forward with postponing the upper-income tax increase, as some advisers have recommended, it would be a powerful way of attracting Republican support on the economic package he outlined over the weekend.

Liberal activists lit up the blogosphere last week when Mr. Obama absolved Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, and asked Democrats not to strip him of his chairmanship of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs despite Mr. Lieberman's endorsement of Mr. McCain for president. Mr. Obama also drew ire from some partisans when he met with Mr. McCain and discussed potential Republican appointments to the cabinet.

Chris Bowers, who writes on the OpenLeft.com blog, complained that the foreign policy lineup was a center-right team. "I feel incredibly frustrated," Mr. Bowers wrote last week. "Progressives are being entirely left out of Obama's major appointments so far."

It is hardly unusual for an incoming president to extend his hand to members of the opposing party. (Mr. Obama is spending a good bit of time, aides said, studying the approach of President Abraham Lincoln.) What is far more difficult, though, is sustaining the radiance of the bipartisan honeymoon, a difficulty President Bush encountered eight years ago after early signs of goodwill to Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, in their pursuit of an education overhaul.

Mr. Obama's challenge is no different - it is perhaps even more acute - as he works to straddle the partisan divide that has grown deeper over the last eight years. Advisers said he was well aware of the balancing act awaiting him, particularly as he worked to avoid disappointing or angering Democrats on the left, a constituency that was vital to his winning the party's nomination.

"Even though the majorities are big, the challenges are of such a magnitude that we're all inheriting, it's going to require bipartisanship to solve," Mr. Emanuel said in an interview after completing a round of meetings with Congressional Republicans. "We're not lip-synching bipartisanship here."

Mr. Emanuel, who was formerly the No. 4 Democrat in the House and helped expand the party's majority in Congress, signaled to Republicans that the president-elect wanted to work alongside them. He handed out his personal cellphone number, urging them to call at any hour if they needed to reach him, and he asked them to submit their ideas for the economic recovery plan and other issues of potential agreement.

Even when they were in the majority, Republicans were often frustrated with the Bush administration's lack of outreach to Congress. They said Mr. Emanuel's arrival on Capitol Hill less than three weeks after the election - though no breakthroughs were made on issues - sent a good preliminary message.

"I think the new administration is off to a good start," said Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky. "This is an opportunity to tackle big issues and to do them in the middle. And it would not be a good idea for the new administration, in my view, to go down a laundry list of left-wing proposals and try to jam them through the Congress."

The bipartisan potential of the Obama administration will be easier to determine, Mr. McConnell and other Republicans said, when more cabinet appointments are known. Mr. Obama has pledged to nominate more than a token Republican to his cabinet, though positions are filling up quickly and only a handful of Republicans have been mentioned.

One sign of Mr. Obama's commitment to bipartisanship, several Republicans said, will be whether he keeps Robert M. Gates on as defense secretary. Democrats familiar with the Obama transition said Mr. Gates was among contenders for the post. The selection is not scheduled to be announced until after Thanksgiving.

"From the point of view of most members of the Senate, that would be a welcome appointment," said Mr. Alexander, the chairman of the Senate Republican Conference. "It would show that the president-elect is thinking more broadly and bipartisan than just a narrow base of antiwar activists."

Mr. Obama's greatest challenge in actually achieving a bipartisan tone includes navigating the demands of Democrats in Congress. Even though Democrats are now two seats shy of having 60 votes in the Senate, Republican cooperation will be needed on big-ticket items.

Mr. McConnell, the top Republican in the Senate, dug up a quotation from Mr. Obama after he was elected to the Senate in 2004, when Republicans were in control of both chambers and the White House. Late last week on Capitol Hill, Mr. McConnell read it aloud, with the words of the president-elect now sounding oddly prescient.

"Whoever's in power is going to have to govern with some modesty and some desire to work with the other side of the aisle," Mr. McConnell read. "That's certainly the approach I would advise Democrats should we regain control."

Summer, I agree that including experienced people in the new administration is good and important...but this man became the Democratic Nominee by promising "change", and dismissing Hillary Clinton as part of the old Washington insiders network that needed to be changed.  Now that he knocked her out of the way to get to the big prize of the presidency, he is putting her and all of her friends into positions of power.  Did something change since this summer?  If they are good enough now, why wasn't she good enough this spring and summer?  Or is it that women are OK in a subservient role, but not in a lead role? 

moodyk13 wrote:

PatMom:  I believe the answer is the mentality that  "women are OK in a subservient role, but not in a lead role!" 

This includes the role of VP.  No one seemed worried whether or not Joe Biden had enough "experience" to step into the role of president.

It's still a "man's" world and until WOMEN step up and stop being so JEALOUS and CATTY of other women, this will never change.

The "feminist" on the other board can thank themselves for this.  They are some of the most jealous, insecure women I have ever seen. 

I guess if Sara Palin were more "butch" looking they might have liked her? 

****************

Moody - you can't be serious.  Joe Biden has been in the Senate forever and has run for President several times.  That's why his readiness to be president wasn't questioned.  People might disagree on whether he would be a "good" president, but it would sound silly to say he lacked experience! 

As for the rest of us being "jealous and insecure", I absolutely find that statement hilarious.  Your "butch" comment reflects your insecurities, not mine.

Feminism is a belief in the political, social, and economic equality of women. 

--->I guess it can be like religion and have different takes on the same core idea.  I don't think that believing in feminism means that you must be non-religious, and support abortions.  Just because I b believe women should be given the same opportunities as a man doesn't mean I think that all women can do all the same jobs that all men can do ... it burns me up when they lower standards for women to be able to qualify!! For me, there are plenty of women who can go the distance, lift the weight or whatever ... heck some men don't pass the physical tests.  But it  even burns me up more when they have lowered testing scores or on academia tests or gpa averages in order for some minorities to qualify.

I LOVE IT, Summer.  Of course I know this was the title of your article, but I SO agree.

We can SO nicely disagree with the dems policies..politics.  I heard Karl Rove say yesterday about BO..something like..he's my president and he should show him respect.  However, he can disagree RESPECTFULLY him..etc. etc.  Rove was saying MUCH.  He knows how President Bush has been treated.  Like some on this board, I do think President Bush will go down in history as a great/good president.  The old war excuse for "not eight more years" doesn't get it when it comes to the Hillary's after voting FOR it and then turns around and bashes President Bush over and over. 

Shirley

I like GWB, too.  But, you have to admit, that poor guy, my dh says that he could come up with a cure for cancer and people would STILL hate him!!  

Lol Shirley. 

Harley, if President Bush found a cure to cancer......the criticism.....why the heck was he medding in medicine?  He should have been doing what president's do...run the country!  Naw, he can't win.  Some over there would like him to resign and let Obama take over.  I hate to clue them in...but Obama doesn't want to take office just yet.  He's got a lot more plannning to do.

Shirley 

Shirley,

Aww...  Don't tell me that you couldn't find a smiley riding a horse?!!   I thought you had a SMILEY for EVERY occasion!!   LOL

You are SO RIGHT!!   Bush just CAN'T win...  But I like him anyway.  I felt ALOT safer with him as pres. than I'll ever feel again, with BO!   I'm just glad that my dh isn't working in DC anymore.  He sometimes worked at the Pentagon, and when I think that he could have been in or NEAR that bulding when the terrorist struck, I get a chill. 

Harley 

WHHHOOOOOAAAA!  Summer, we're coming after Canada!  Get out now while it's safe!

Shirley

Bush is behind these bailouts or so it seems.  I really am tired of hearing about them.  What is going to happen if these companies especially the car makers.  Maybe in the case of the car workers the unions will disappear and maybe people will get paid based on performance and not because they showed up to work long enough to get a raise.  I used to work at a couple of union places and hated it.  I guess I am an overachiever and the people I worked with would do the minimum amount of work and know they would get raises because of union rules and I work my tail of and get no recognition for my hard work.  In the real world I would get the raises for my hard work and the slackers wouldn't

Aw shucks shokk,

You left off socialist & communist from the "left" description! Oh, I can't remember, did you leave out atheist also? You're slipping! LOL

Obama Advisers, Congressional Leaders Repeat Demands for Auto Industry Reform

Congressional leaders and members of President-elect Barack Obama's administration weighed in Sunday on the proposed 25 billion dollar bailout for the auto industry.  

FOXNews.com

Sunday, November 23, 2008

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who insisted last week that the companies be "accountable and viable," said Congress would not let the companies fall. 

"Let's just be very clear. Not helping the auto industry is not an option. It's just a question of how we go forward, and if we're going forward, to be preeminent in the world, and we think that that opportunity is there," she said.

Members of President-elect Barack Obama's incoming administration also called on the automakers to restructure their companies as a pre-condition to getting any government dollars.

"What we can't give is a blank check for an industry that isn't prepared to reform itself, to rationalize itself, and to retool for the markets of today and tomorrow. And if -- and so he expects that they will do that," Obama senior adviser David Axelrod said.

So looks to me like Obama's team is gonna figure a way to give them the money if it kills them.