The Conservative Case Against George W. Bush       

Some conservative observers have, however, begun  to think the unthinkable, and have begun to question the priorities and policies the Bush presidency, and consider whether these advance or undermine the essential conservative values of limited government, fiscal responsibility, personal liberty, and sound, effective national defense.

Some contend the President utilizes the rhetoric of traditional, limited government, free enterprise American values, which are hostile to the concept of empire, but consistently has advanced policies better described as "corporate cronyism" and international adventurism which undermine traditional conservative values.  These Bush Administration policies have paradoxically resulted in a higher rate of growth of domestic discretionary federal spending than under Democratic administrations, have been lax in avoidance of pork-barrel favoritism and overly cozy relationships with particular corporate interests, and have resulted in a reckless foreign policy which has isolated us from traditional allies, inflamed the passions of terrorist enemies, and embroiled us in an ill-advised, nation building war without a discernable end.  The constitutional provision of Congressional authority to declare was was subverted by the selective use of cherry-picked "intelligence" (which post invasion findings showed to be inaccurate or exagerrated) cynically presented to Congress and the public to present a public justification for invasion (weapons of mass destruction) which differed from the real motive for war.  This real reason was kept from the public and Congress, not only because planning for war with Iraq had begun within the first 10 days of inauguration (8 months before 9/11), not only because the grandiose goals of Administration hawks to forcibly restructure the Middle East and increase American military presence and bases throughout the world offends the American hostility to the concepts of empire and global domination, but because these goals directly contradicted the principles elucidated by presidential candidate Bush in his campaign for the Presidency.  Such policies of fiscal and foreign policy recklessness, and abuse of constitutional principles, are contrary to traditional American and conservative values.

_______________________________________

Conservative disaffection for the Bush presidency is increasingly expressed. In the following articles, two articulate conservatives eloquently state the case against George W. Bush:

Doug Bandow, former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan, senior fellow, The Cato Institute,  "Righteous Anger: The Conservative Case Against George W. Bush", The American Conservative, December 1, 2003 “Despite occasional exceptions, the Bush administration, backed by the Republican-controlled Congress, has been promoting larger government at almost every turn. Its spending policies have been irresponsible, and its trade strategies have been destructive. The president has been quite willing to sell out the national interest for perceived political gain, whether the votes sought are from seniors or farmers. The terrorist attacks of 9/11 encouraged the administration to push into law civil-liberties restrictions that should worry anyone, whether they are wielded by a Bush or a Clinton administration.... “President George W. Bush has made Woodrow Wilson the guiding spirit of Republican foreign policy. A candidate who criticized nation building is now pursuing global social engineering. The representative of a party that once criticized foreign aid is now pushing lavish U.S. social spending abroad, demanding that it be a gift rather than a loan.... “....the administration has advanced a doctrine of pre-emption that encourages war for allegedly humanitarian ends. Attempting to justify the Iraqi war retrospectively by pointing to Saddam Hussein’s manifold crimes, the president apparently believes he may attack any nation to advance human rights.... “Liberals should identify with the Bush record. He is increasing the size and power of the U.S. government both at home and abroad. He has expanded social engineering from the American nation to the entire globe. He is lavish with dollars on both domestic and foreign programs. For this the Left hates him? “....George W. Bush enjoys neither royal nor religious status that would place him beyond criticism. Whether or not he is a real conservative, he is no friend of limited, constitutional government. And for that the American people should be very, very angry.” (to complete article)

        The Case for Divided Government       

Conservatives have observed the paradox of Republican Congresses producing more conservative results under a Democratic president than under a Republican. Presidents are often forced by necessity to make accommodations with a hostile Congress, while political parties controlling both the presidency and Congress are under intense pressure to produce the appearance of progress, even if the long term consequences are detrimental to future generations of taxpayers. 

Witness, for example, the passage of welfare reform in 1996 under a Democratic president and a Republican controlled Congress (an accomplishment that many doubt could have been achieved by a Republican president). Compare this to the spectacle of a Republican Congress, despite facing the impending bankruptcy of Medicare and Social Security, being pressured by a "conservative" President Bush to pass the largest expansion of federal entitlements and the size of the federal government since Lyndon Johnson's Great Society.

Under the second Bush administration, Republicans have  combined the rhetoric of fiscal restraint with the reality of fiscal recklessness. William Niskanen, former acting chairman of President Reagan's Council of Economic Advisors, shows that the real  rate of growth in federal outlays has been 4.4% under george W. Bush, compared to 0.9% under Bill Clinton.  Even if military spending and non-discretionary domestic spending are excluded, and discretionary domestic spending, the type most easily controlled, is isolated, the biggest spender in the last 40 years is George W. Bush, with an 8.2% annual increase, according to Stephen Moore of the Club for Growth.

With this in mind, conservatives with consequential differences with President Bush on matters related to foreign policy, the war in Iraq, the conduct of the war on terrorism, issues of civil liberties, the rule of law, and fiscal responsibility, are considering the benefits of divided government. Because of the prevalence of "safe seats" in the House of Representatives consequent to redistricting, and because of the large number of Senate Democrats facing re-election this year, control of either house of Congress by Democrats is unlikely in the absence of a Kerry landslide.  A landslide by either party in 2004 appears unlikely.

"Republicans are swiftly forfeiting the perception that they are especially responsible stewards of government finances. It is surreal for a Republican president to submit a budget to a Republican-controlled Congress and have Republican legislators vow to remove the "waste" that he has included and that they have hitherto funded." . George F. Will, February 9, 2004

Military Leaders, Diplomats, Conservatives, Grass Roots Republicans,

Former Bush Supporters Rejecting George W. Bush

Retired general: Bush foreign policy a 'national disaster' , CNN.com, July 31, 2004,      

Retired General Tony McPeak, the Air Force Chief of Staff during the first Gulf War, a former fighter pilot who campaigned for Bob Dole in 1996 and for George W. Bush in 2000, say Bush's first 3 years have been "a national disaster", but John Kerry is "up to the task" of re-building. General McPeak says Bush has

 "alienated our friends, damaged our credibility around the world, reduced our influence to an all-time low in my lifetime, given hope to our enemies."

Bush Censure by Envoys May Be a First  Bloomberg.com, June 18, 2004

 "The statement by 27 former diplomats and military officers on Wednesday calling for the defeat of U.S. President George W. Bush may be unprecedented.  'Their prominence and seniority and influence when in their diplomatic or military posts, and their number, is really remarkable,'' said Richard Kohn, the Pentagon's chief Air Force historian from 1981-1991.

The group, which includes Democrats and Republicans, said Bush's foreign policy and the war in Iraq have damaged U.S. security.

"From the outset, George W. Bush adopted an overbearing approach to America's role in the world, relying upon military might and righteousness, insensitive to the concerns of traditional friends and allies, and disdainful of the United Nations,'' said the group, Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change, in a statement Wednesday. They said Bush should be defeated, without explicitly endorsing Kerry, 60.

The group included Jack Matlock Jr., President Ronald Reagan's ambassador to the Soviet Union; retired Admiral William Crowe, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman under Reagan; Charles Freeman, President George H.W. Bush's ambassador to Saudi Arabia; and retired Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill McPeak, who is advising Kerry's campaign.

Fukuyama Withdraws Bush Support, July 14, 2004

Francis Fukuyama, one of the founding fathers of the neo-conservative movement that underlies the policies of US President George W. Bush's administration, said on July 13 that he would not vote for the incumbent in the November 2 US Presidential election.

In 1997, Fukuyama together with Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Jeb Bush, signed a declaration entitled 'The New American Century Project'. That declaration set the groundwork for the neo-conservative movement.

Fukuyama began to distance himself from the administration during the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. The tension between the two came to a head prior to the invasion of Iraq. Fukuyama opposed the war.....Fukuyama had warned that after the war, Iraq would be dragged into an internal conflict and would export terror to the world.

Is Bush a Conservative?  Nels Stemm, Lew Rockwell.com, June 18, 2004

“George W. Bush claims the mantle of conservative. What is he conserving? Not my tax dollars. Not my liberty. Not the moral standards of my society. The only thing he seems to be conserving – rapidly expanding more like it – is the arbitrary power that the federal government holds over our lives.”

Republicans for Kerry   http://www.republicansforkerry.org

“(The) Bush administration rightly had the support of the American people after the terrorist attacks. The country rallied around the president, but he squandered his legitimacy.”

“ An America that is feared and hated in the world – the result of Bush foreign policy – is going to be much less influential than an America that could have been strong and respected. The federal deficit has skyrocketed, both because of the war in Iraq, and because of discretionary spending in which billions of dollars have been handed out like candy in support of votes. It is hard to believe that a Democrat could do worse....

“Presidential administrations tend to ‘move to the center,’ especially when they are working with a congress of the opposing party. Bill Clinton balanced the budget and signed a Republican welfare bill, two worthy Republican goals. On the other hand, a ‘conservative’ George W. Bush has not only pursued a war policy that is harming the military and damaging our international credibility, he has also allowed the deficit to become a menace at home...

“Checks and balances," according to Alexander Hamilton, "are means, and powerful means, by which the excellences of republican government may be retained and its imperfections lessened or avoided. (Federalist 9.)...

“Our two-party political system was set up to enable the Republic to right itself...

“Of course a Democrat will support things that Republicans won't want to support. But it should be painfully obvious that there is no such thing as a "perfect candidate," and we should set our priorities and gird ourselves for the discussion.”

John Bugay, Republicans for Kerry           (complete article)   

Comments from grassroots Republicans supporting John Kerry:   http://www.republicansforkerry.org/Quotes.html         "Bush's doctrine of preemptive war sets a dangerous precedent. He started a war based on deception. He has no fiscal discipline. He has weakened constitutional liberties, disregarded international law, and made a mockery of the Christian faith." "I am one of those Republicans who believed all the accusations and supported the invasion of Iraq. I am not as much for Kerry as I am against Bush."   "I can't support any of GWB's positions. His policies are non-effective and potentially dangerous/deadly for Americans/American soldiers. ....vote Kerry."   "Once-proud Republican is now ashamed of the party. Conservative used to refer to fiscal sense, not huge budgets required by corporate welfare..."   "I am a Vietnam-era Veteran, unlike incumbent Republican politicians. Those promoting the war with Iraq, who should have served during Vietnam era, dodged the draft. Now they are sending others to die for their own political agenda." "I’ve voted Republican since McGovern. Bush betrayed the principles of the Constitution when he attacked unprovoked Iraq. Our founding fathers fought so that a nation could decide its own fate without outside interference. He’s no leader but a misleader."

Republicans for Kerry '04     “Country Before Party”     http://www.republicansforkerry04.org

More comments from grassroots Republicans, from Republicans for Kerry '04 site:   http://www.republicansforkerry04.org        "Many of us on this board have a very long GOP history. I have been a card carrying Republican for 25 years ... I voted enthusiastically for W in 2000, Dole in 96, and Bush 1 in 92, and Reagan. I've worked for a Republican congressman's local office, I've never voted for a Democrat for the House or Senate....   "The fact is, coming to the decision to support Kerry has been difficult for many of us, because of our GOP background. So you can imagine how disgusted we must be at the the direction of our party, and the personal attacks on people who dare question the President or his failed and dangerous policies. I think you have to expect some venting here, many of us feel as if our party principles have been betrayed." "I'm leaving President Bush because I believe in balanced budgets,environmental conservation and a foreign policy that is strong without being needlessly belligerent... "I'm leaving President Bush because the image, reputation and influence of our country in the world is at stake... "I'm leaving President Bush, because we've been lied to regarding weapons of mass destruction, about the connection between Iraq and Al-Qaida (when CIA was telling us before the war that there was no such connection... "On countless times, in front of TV cameras, I've supported President Bush and the Administration views. I had to battle against Belgian Ministers and Political Leaders. I took the bruises, I took the insults, because I thought I was fighting for the right cause. Now I realize I was wrong. The war in the battle field was easily won, but we lost it in the field of honor and in the field of ideas... "I'm leaving President Bush because I no longer support what we're doing in Iraq... "I'm leaving President Bush because our deficit grows by the day and we're mortgaging future generations." - Christian D. de Fouloy   "No one wants to be a Republican more than I, but I can't in good conscience vote to continue this dishonest, arrogant, ignorant and irresponsible administration. I have two beautiful kids, and I'd love to have them grow up in a world where they can take my grandchildren fishing in clean streams, travel abroad without being hated, and (for my son) not have to worry about being drafted into some unnecessary, interminable foreign quagmire." - Dr. Robert Smith of Kansas City, Missouri, who voted for Bush in 2000 but will vote for John Kerry this year. "George Bush led America into a war of choice based on . . . false justification. The catastrophic toll so far: nearly 1,000 U.S. dead, 7,000 U.S. wounded, 12,000 Iraqi dead, 40,000 Iraqi wounded, untold misery and heartbreak among surviving families, and no end in sight to the violence. Iraq has become a rallying cry and breeding ground for a new wave of bin Ladens. John McCain and others predict that U.S. troops will be fighting to stabilize Iraq for at least 10 more years..." - Tom Terez, Do Unto Others: An Honest Look at George Bush's Record      "I have been a Republican since my teenage years. I proudly served as a senior political appointee in the Reagan and Bush senior administrations at the US Commerce Department. I believe that George W. Bush has essentially stolen my party from me. My Republican party has a core set of principles and beliefs. We don't hold these beliefs to get elected. We seek election to put these beliefs into action... "By any measure, this Administration has abandoned the prudence and caution that were the hallmarks of my Republican Party... "The President likes to talk about his tax cuts. My Republican Party knows the difference between a tax cut and a tax deferral. The $400 billion of government we didn't pay for this year, we - or our grandchildren - will still have to pay for. My Republican Party knows that the ONLY way to cut taxes is to cut spending. Unfortunately, this Administration is throwing money at any interest group it thinks it has a chance of buying votes from. But government spending doesn't hurt less just because it is a Republican writing the checks... "I am a Republican who is supporting John Kerry because I believe it is unpatriotic to stand by and do nothing while our government is bankrupted and our principles trashed. I want to be able to look my grandchildren in the eyes and say I did my best to maintain the legacy of our great country for them."       - Dr. Tim Ashby, Why I Am a Republican Who Is Supporting John Kerry             "I have been a Republican since 1980 and an elected PCP (Precinct Committee Person) since 1984. During that time I have served on the Multnomah County Republican Central Committee, as a member of the Multnomah County Executive Board, as a delegate to the State Central Committee, as a delegate to the State Republican Platform Convention, worked on numerous candidate campaigns for both state and national office, worked on several issue based campaigns, and for eight years I sat on a statewide legislative commission representing the Oregon/Idaho Conference of the United Methodist Church... "As a Republican my loyalty to the party cannot be questioned, not by anyone nor for any reason. But I also have a higher loyalty; that is my loyalty to my country, to the nation, to the Republic, to the United States of America. And my loyalty to my country is second only to my loyalty to God, the Father, the Master Architect, that that created all that there is. But my loyalty to my party comes second to my loyalty to my country. And as a loyal citizen of the United States of America it is my duty and my responsibility to speak up when I believe that my country is headed in the wrong direction."    - David Griffiths, Our Priceless Legacies

Come Back to the Mainstream, 

Republican Leaders Speak Out

In a statement published August 30 in The New York Times, seventeen leaders and former elected officials called on the Republican Party to come back to the mainstream, including:

Gov. David Cargo, New Mexico, 1967-71
Gov. Dan Evans, Washington, 1965-77
Gov. A. Linwood Holton, Virginia, 1970-74
Gov. Willam G. Milliken, Michigan, 1969-83
Gov. Walter R. Peterson, New Hampshire, 1969-73
Sen. Charles M. Mathias, Jr., Maryland, 1969-87
Sen. Robert T. Stafford, Vermont, 1971-89

A Telling Shift of Allegiance, September 12, 2004,

              
  
Why I Will Vote for John Kerry for President, John Eisenhower, September 28, 2004,  http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=44657    

"...Responsibility used to be observed in foreign affairs. That has meant respect for others. America, though recognized as the leader of the community of nations, has always acted as a part of it, not as a maverick separate from that community and at times insulting towards it.....Recent developments indicate that the current Republican Party leadership has confused confident leadership with hubris and arrogance...

"Today many people are rightly concerned about our precious individual freedoms, our privacy, the basis of our democracy. Of course we must fight terrorism, but have we irresponsibly gone overboard in doing so? I wonder. In 1960, President Eisenhower told the Republican convention, “If ever we put any other value above (our) liberty, and above principle, we shall lose both.” I would appreciate hearing such warnings from the Republican Party of today....

"The Republican Party I used to know placed heavy emphasis on fiscal responsibility, which included balancing the budget whenever the state of the economy allowed it to do so. The Eisenhower administration accomplished that difficult task three times during its eight years in office. It did not attain that remarkable achievement by cutting taxes for the rich. Republicans disliked taxes, of course, but the party accepted them as a necessary means of keep the nation’s financial structure sound...

"Sen. Kerry, in whom I am willing to place my trust, has demonstrated that he is courageous, sober, competent, and concerned with fighting the dangers associated with the widening socio-economic gap in this country. I will vote for him enthusiastically.

I celebrate, along with other Americans, the diversity of opinion in this country. But let it be based on careful thought. I urge everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike, to avoid voting for a ticket merely because it carries the label of the party of one’s parents or of our own ingrained habits."    

Conscientious Objector: Why I Can't Vote for Bush, How George W. Bush Has Betrayed Conservatives' Most Cherished Principles,  Robert A. George, October 19, 2004