If Bush were a true conservative he would never allow the government to run huge budget deficits year after year like he has done. He would have never taken us into a war in Iraq preemptively without our allies sharing the cost, especially when there was in fact, no immediate threat to the US. Its funny how quickly the war in Iraq started off as a search for WMD but turned into a mission the free the Iraqi people. If Bush was a true conservative, he would not be advocating and passing legislation that increases the size and power of the federal government. He would not be sticking the states with large un-funded mandates. And he would not be trying to create a huge new federal bureaucracy who's unconstitutional goal is to fund religious organizations that offer social services in place of social programs that his budgets have cut. And yet, SO many conservatives worship this man. Does partisanism really make people this blind? Liberals are just as bad, but one question at a time.
2006-07-08 07:05:17 · 10 answers · asked by loser 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Coach - YOU need the facts. Bush raised the deficit by 5 trillion dollars. While naturally there is a need to higher expenditure, this level of expenditure is NOT justified. It's not just the war and terrorism that is the problem, Bush's administration is a fiscal disaster.
I know he more or less is a social conservative, but I'm not 100% sold. I feel like he doesn't respect the constitution like a conservative should. And really, if you are just a social conservative, then to be an effective president, you need to actually DO something. All he has done is successfully delay the granting of gay marriage. THATS IT. Is this a reason to celebrate him?
Also, since he has raised the deficit by 5 trillion dollars, he is an economic failure. You can point to an occasional economic success here and there, but he HAS failed miserably econmocially.
Oh well. Hopefully republicans pick someone better next time. Its almost over.
2006-07-08 07:34:42 · update #1
One more thing guys, thanks to most of you for providing BALANCED answers. It's not too often I get reasonable, intelligent, balanced opinions in the politcs section on here.
2006-07-08 07:40:37 · update #2
Don't forget that there is more than one type of conservatism - the main ones being fiscal conservatism and social conservatism. While President Bush has shown himself to be socially very conservative, his fiscal policies leave a lot to be desired.
While I had seriously hoped President Bush to be much more fiscally conservative, we will never know what he might have done had 9/11 not happened. He started down the right road with his first round of tax cuts, but then huge spending was required to answer our nation's pitiful readiness against terrorism.
All in all, I have to say that President Bush has been a fairly conservative, very effective president. His tax policies have increased monies coming into the nation's coffers - 25% more so than Clinton ever raised. His economic policies have the nation's economy growing at a very fast clip. His military and anti-terror policies have kept our nation free from terror attacks for almost five years.
We have to remember that there is never a perfect candidate who will fit the bill for all of the people. We can only hope for the best when we elect a president - and realize that it COULD be much worse.
2006-07-08 07:13:56 · answer #1 · answered by Outlaw 1-3 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The deficits that we have now were caused by what took place against this country on 9/11. The results of these extra expenditures can be seen in the very fact that we have not been attacked again. Look at today's news - there was a plot underway to blow up trains and tunnels in New York. Efforts on our part exposed and prevented this horrific event.
We have a race of people who hate us and want to kill us. Look around. You must live in cave or get your news from The Daily Show. Did you not hear about the chemical weapons that were recently found, the recent information about Saddam and ties to Al Caida.
Some portions of the government have grown (law enforcement and intelligence) - many other parts of the government have lost people. You really need to get all of the facts together.
2006-07-08 07:18:27 · answer #2 · answered by Coach D. 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As another posted stated, Bush is a social conservative. Bush is not a fiscal conservative however. He has proved himself to be a spendthrift.
Partisanship does make people blind. I think the Republicans have better choices than Bush. Bush is for less taxes, but a larger bureaucracy. This values do not mix.
2006-07-08 07:12:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I disagree on your point one. Pre-emptive (and it really wasn't - Saddam had 12 years to comply with a Treaty he himself signed before Operation Iraqi Freedom went into effect).
Your second point is well marked however. He is spending like a tax and spend liberal. And the size of government has drastically increased too. The only, and possibly moot answer, I could justify would be that the Executive Branch is the most removed political office from its base. And that's just a given.
2006-07-08 07:11:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the purely issues conservative about him is his record on holding classic marriage, slicing taxes and being prolife. His extreme spending, turning out to be authorities and professional amnesty information at the on the spot are not conservative. that is the position his liberalism shows. a useless ringer for huckabee...except huck raised taxes diverse situations. So bush is extra conservative than huckabee.
2016-10-14 06:15:54 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hes a neo con which is really just an insane form of liberal economics that would frighten liberals and unrealistic foreign policy that would make conservatives crap there pants
2006-07-08 07:10:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ignorance is in at the moment.
It's hip to be ignorant.
This fad helps those with average to low intelligence feel some sense of pride.
2006-07-08 07:10:39 · answer #7 · answered by Subterfuge 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Excellent question. Here is another thing I don't get.
How can he be a hawk about war, but such a lame duck regarding border patrol? It just does not compute.
2006-07-08 07:52:57 · answer #8 · answered by sassyk 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
he claims to be a fiscal conservative which means "born-again" Christian,,, no matter,, he represents the Republican Party and the GOP,, he is a conservative true blue to the core,,, they make bad Presidents......... VOTE DEMOCRAT
2006-07-08 07:12:38 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He is a social conservative (or at least he makes speeches that attempt to please social conservatives).
I agree with you that there is nothing conservative about spending policies. It makes Clinton's years look positively frugal.
2006-07-08 07:09:09 · answer #10 · answered by WBrian_28 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋