The American Spectator

George Bruce| 7.8.09 @ 11:13PM

To be fair, of all the Bushes, Jeb would be my first choice. However, we've had two Bushes too many. The expiration date on that product is 1990. What is leftover is spoiled and needs to be thrown out. I concur.

NO MORE BUSHES!!!!!!!

Cliff| 7.8.09 @ 11:22PM

Oh good grief. Get a life. First off, W didn't "betray" anything. Second, even if he did, Jeb is not W.

Saying that Jeb is disqualified because of his last name being born into a wealthy prominent family is just as bad as saying someone is disqualified because they were born penniless nobodies. Both are treating them not as individuals, but as part of a class system. Which is totally against everything America stands for.

Jeb was one of the best governors in the country for 8 years and transformed the Florida Republican Party into a totally dominant force. I'm not saying I want him for President, I'd personally rather Mitch Daniels, but he shouldn't be disqualified because of his last name.

William R| 7.9.09 @ 12:12AM

Jeb Bush is just another elitist out of touch with middle America. With unemployment near double digits and climbing, he's still pushing amnesty for millions of very poor mostly Mexican illegal aliens. That alone disqualifies him from higher office IMO. He's just another corporate welfare pimp!!!

Jabberwock| 7.9.09 @ 12:17AM

Another illegal alien loving amnesty pusher. To Hell with the Bushes.

Liberal Reader| 7.9.09 @ 12:18AM

Hilarious. "Hamburgers are the future of cows."

Another Bush does not seem likely.

How about this:

Nominate Newt.

Newt Gingrich's politics drive me up a wall, but he's an intellectually active, ideas-oriented conservative. In a debate, he's virtually unbeatable.

I guess the problem is that independents don't like him. But the independents will NEVER vote for Romney, a man I will go on insisting is one of the final five. Palin will never win the moderate vote, even if she can secure the nomination.

bigskybob| 7.9.09 @ 12:20AM

George Herbert Walker Bush promised the American people, "Read my lips! No new taxes. George Herbert Walker Bush proceded to raise taxes. In that one act, George Herbert Walker Bush not only betrayed the people who supported him precisely because he pledged not to raise taxes, but, he betrayed the entire nation by reducing elections from a process where the electorate chooses how they what to be governed [say, by a politician opposed to all tax increases], to a choice between two men. [Bill Clinton eviscerated that choice when he falsely portrayed himself as a chastened man who deeply regretted the "pain he caused in his marriage," when he had no intention to be monogomous whatsoever.]

In 1992, instead of repudiating George Herbert Walker Bush, the Republican party renominated him. The American people had the final say, and he was strongly repudiated in November.

Pappy Bush used his control over the Republican machine to get his boy the nomination. The Bush boy was the second least qualified President this Century, just behind Barak Obama. Having the good fortune of his opponent being endorsing John Kerry saved him from being repudiated by the electorate in 2004. The American people, promptly repudiated the GOP in both 2006 and 2008.

If the Republican party wants to survive, it has best listen to the verdict of the American people: we repudiate George Herbert Walker Bush.

bigskybob| 7.9.09 @ 12:23AM

Opps, Bush Jr. had the good fortune of Bin Laden endorsing his opponent, otherwise he would have lost.

bluespapa| 7.9.09 @ 12:53AM

Didn't Reagan sign an amnesty bill for illegals? My memory is he raised taxes after promising not to, and fleeing Lebanon after stationing troops there.

And expanding government by cutting the speed of its growth.

Honestly, if it's the illegal workers that !eb has betrayed America with, could someone tell me why I hear more about it from Republicans like W, Reagan, Jeb, and McCain than any Democrats? No Democrat wants immigration to be his signature accomplishment when running for president. He, she'd lose.

Tootsie| 7.9.09 @ 1:42AM

Are they blind, stupid or arrogant? Or all three? NO MORE BUSHES--The Republican Party couldn't survive another one.

Claire Solt| 7.9.09 @ 1:49AM

Republicans need to adopt a positive narrative that highlights sucesses. You are all such saps you pick up on the negativity the left spews and let it put you into a blue funk. Resist the propaganda!

vic| 7.9.09 @ 2:43AM

How refreshing. Nothing like this could be posted at Free Republic. The Bushbots will take care of you for sure.
You know, speaking of that ....
Cliff, go check out Free Republic if you are not already a member. Your Stockholm Syndrome will always be in vogue over there.
Jeb was a liar, like W.
Jeb sat by while Terry died, blubbering that he could do nothing when he could have plugged the cord back into the wall.
Jeb was only second to his criminal brother in supporting the Mexican invasion.
Amen, brothers, amen. NO MORE BUSHES!

Reaganite Republican Resistanc| 7.9.09 @ 5:05AM

Right on Stacey-

Jeb has nothing to say worth hearing, isn't he the one who called respect for Reagan's principles "nostolgia"? Talk about a guy who doesn't get it. And while anyone would be a welcome change from what we've got now, we will be needing a principled conservative to unwind ObamaLand, you're sure right there.

I hope nobody wastes any precious time and energy promoting Jeb for 2012, hard to see why they thought he should run anyway-

Sean| 7.9.09 @ 6:42AM

Under GW the Republican party lost its mantle as the fiscally responsible party. The Democrats are not fiscally responsible either, but the Republicans lost the high ground. GW pushed for amnesty which most American do not want. There is no need for another Bush. The Republican party has been damaged by then enough. What the Republican party needs are candidates that give the American people a clear choice. The current establishment doesn't give us that.

Atomicman| 7.9.09 @ 6:47AM

Please,please no more people with that last name!Compassionate conservatism sounds like, ' we will manage the welfare state better'. Remember the Whigs outlived there usefullness.

anonymous| 7.9.09 @ 7:27AM

No more Bushes! I like George W. better than Jeb. I am a true conservative. I prefer someone like Sarah Palin.

Tim| 7.9.09 @ 8:17AM

George the First was always reckoned
Vile, but viler George the Second.
And what mortal ever heard
Any good of George the Third,
But when from earth the Fourth descended
God be praised the Georges ended

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Savage_Landor

Deborah D| 7.9.09 @ 8:52AM

Sean -- I'm with you. I keep looking for someone worth supporting in the Republican Party, but at the moment, no one looks worthy. Until a Republican comes out talking about liberty, American values, and taking back the country from socialists and illegal immigrants...I'm holding my support.

Ran| 7.9.09 @ 8:58AM

"Lie down with Bushes, wake up with Democrats."

RSM, yeah... It's a specific case of the general law:

"Buy a RINO, you'll receive a free Democrat!"

Sometime earlier, in a blog far far away, someone said: "What bugs me is Conservatism's fault - the 40% - in permitting the Liberal 21% to dominate in Government. It's near terminal electile dysfunction. It happens because Conservatives - as Republicans - accept the Big Lie: "To win, Republicans must appeal to the Center." What utter, contemptible BS.

It's time to eschew the word "moderate:" "The Center" is hardly an ideologically monolithic bloc. It's composed of "Centrists", "Moderates", "Undecideds", the Confused, the Uninformed and a whole lot of Uncommitted shoppers looking for a Party who will represent their wallets from election to election. Note, in the face of tyranny, there is no honour in being "moderate." And yet in the face of Tyranny, we are told that we need to "appeal" to this "bloc."

Don't buy it.

That huge midriff-glut we call the Centre has enough electoral potential for Conservative candidates if they merely represent themselves as... Conservatives.

There is so much to offer within the Conservative and Libertarian marketplace... Work on our base with a solid Conservative-Libertarian message and enough followers in the Centre will be ours. The result will be a huge statistical advantage."

That's why I'm not buying Jeb or Mitt or Newt. Maybe a Sarah, perhaps a Fred.

james23| 7.9.09 @ 9:10AM

Mitt Romneycare's role is 08 was as Jeb's stalking horse. What did Jeb conclude about his own viability after Mitten's failure ?

Under no circumstances would I support either man.

On the other hand, there might be a silver lining to a Jeb nomination. His defeat by socialist Obama might be the final nail in the Whigs' coffin.

Aaron| 7.9.09 @ 9:24AM

A final nail in the Republican coffin for sure. There definitely would be a huge third party showing in the next election if Geo. Jeb Bush got the nomination.

Grzmlyk| 7.9.09 @ 9:42AM

Shakespeare's King Lear captures my senitments about Jeb Bush and his putative nomination as the Republican candidate:

Never, Never, Never, Never, Never.

And I will simply repeate: NEVER!!!!!

I don't care what Jeb did or said in Florida. I've heard him speak in the last few months and he is the exact same go-along-to-get-along, gee -we-Republicans-can-be-"compassionate-too liberal in conservative's clothing that his brother and father were.

Among his many gifts to liberalism, he will be a willing doormat for illegals.

Jeb's nomination would be the equivalent of signing the death certificate of conservatism in American politics.

Here's an idea for the Republican party: Why don't we stop hitting ourselves in the head with a hammer?

Red Phillips| 7.9.09 @ 9:43AM

"First off, W didn't "betray" anything."

What? Bush's two terms were nothing but one big betrayal.

Grzmlyk| 7.9.09 @ 9:48AM

By the way, Newt is not to be trusted either. Did you see those ads he appeared in with Nancy Pelosi talking about "it's every American's responsibility to stop global warming?" I fell off my chair!!

And what about his appearance on Fox News in that dopey special fearmongering like a good lib about the bird flu?

Newt has great ideas in the abstract, but in the rough-and-tumble of politics they lie supine in front of his bottomless desire to be adored - it's the same disease too many Republicans fall prey to.

Forget Newt and forget Mitt - Mitt couldn't even muster anything but a well-coiffed-but-flaccid campaign against McCain!! Using his bottomless wallet!!!

As for Sarah, time will tell. She's not fully baked yet.

hermit| 7.9.09 @ 10:21AM

300,000,000 people in this country and somehow the fate of the nation can only be secured if keep someone from a few select families in the game? 233 years ago we threw off the yoke of monarchy and the aristocracy.
Kennedy, Bush, Rockefeller, Gore, Mr. and Mrs. Clinton the list goes on and on of rulers anointed from birth to take their proper place in the ‘family business’. We have so fallen asleep and become so derelict in our civic responsibilities that we have allowed these and other families to believe they have a birth right to government office. Recall the recent Kennedy to replace Clinton farce in New York.
On the one hand we have these families that are the only place we can go to find a leader, on the other we have these clowns being elected and re-elected for life.
Every 10 years we have a census and the legislatures of every state then redraws the map of congressional districts. Depending on which party is in power they create safe districts for their team. And if our team wins we think it is a great deal right, except that safe district tends to stay in the hands of the same representative until they choose to move up retire or die.
WE ARE TERM LIMITS! Our entire government was originally designed so that we would select from among ourselves someone to send to the next higher level of government to represent our interests. The idea is they would change often so that they had more in common with us than each other. They tell us it is so complicated, that we need all this experience and expertise to govern effectively. Look at every congressman across this country, look at their staffs. What you will see is a permanent campaign committee paid for at our expense.
Within these pages we read daily of the experience or lack thereof possess by various candidates. Our nation would be much better served by a dramatic decrease in experience and a comparable increase in character in the candidates we select. Dedication to the constitution, commitment to our founding principles, honestly, integrity, these are the core of what we must have in our representative.
Everyone seems so concerned about the moderates; consider this they are by definition swayable. If the argument pulls them one way they go, if it pulls them other they go that way, in short they are looking to be lead. We revere Reagan as the conservative’s conservative, but his greatest gift was he led. He spoke clearly about the core values of this nation and the moderates followed him. His message was unambiguous. We do not need (or in my opinion want) policy wonks. We need our congress to be filled with us people who love this country, share our views and values, and come from our neighborhoods.
If we will refrain from electing anyone who has had an immediate family member serve in the same office within the past 4 years I do not think the nation will collapse.

Bill Pearce| 7.9.09 @ 10:32AM

The Republican Party must be insane to consider Jeb Bush or any Bush scion on a Republican ticket.
The American public has never been infatuated with political dynasty as the Europeans. The American public has good reasons for its attitude. Political dynasty's have been symptomatic of political decline.
It is often the last stage before political obliteration. The reason is obvious, when one family dominates a political party, they will no longer tolerate any other ideas or viewpoints. The family will insist of complete loyalty above all else. Any other ideas or viewpoints are a direct challenge to the family's rule. Unfortunately for the political dynasty, reality is constantly changing around them. The political dynasty will sooner or later will find its predominate ideas and viewpoints no longer matching reality.
The end comes quickly for a dynasty that will not see facts. The Bush family is well past that point.

Basil Plumley| 7.9.09 @ 10:51AM

@ Ran

You said-Sometime earlier, in a blog far far away, someone said: "What bugs me is Conservatism's fault - the 40% - in permitting the Liberal 21% to dominate in Government. It's near terminal electile dysfunction. It happens because Conservatives - as Republicans - accept the Big Lie: "To win, Republicans must appeal to the Center." What utter, contemptible BS.

It's time to eschew the word "moderate:" "The Center" is hardly an ideologically monolithic bloc. It's composed of "Centrists", "Moderates", "Undecideds", the Confused, the Uninformed and a whole lot of Uncommitted shoppers looking for a Party who will represent their wallets from election to election. Note, in the face of tyranny, there is no honour in being "moderate." And yet in the face of Tyranny, we are told that we need to "appeal" to this "bloc."

Let's understand what a moderate is, it is a creature that is obedient to leadership. They have no convictions other than they do not rock the boat; even if that boat is on course with an iceberg.
Why did Reagan do so well? He was a leader, a man of conviction. He appealed to the beliefs of the common person with conviction and leadership.
When Reagan said we should have not left Vietnam without victory, he appealed to the sensibilities of a lot of people who felt abandoned by politicians who caved to a vocal minority.
When Reagan said, "Mr. Moderater, I paid for this microphone ......", the people knew they had a champion willing to fight.
Today, politics is a sales job, a con job. How many people can you fool with Hope and Change or by saying Christ is my hero.

Sorry Jeb, Reaganism isn't nostalgia, it's a roadmap. Conservatism is system of beliefs not an opportunity for power. When Conservatives fail to lead, they become Dem Lite panderers.
Don't forget that Newt was once a Rockefeller GOP delegate.

BTW Ran, I love this line of yours:

"Buy a RINO, you'll receive a free Democrat!"

Damn straight!

Ran| 7.9.09 @ 11:24AM

"Conservatism is system of beliefs not an opportunity for power."

Basil, old chap, I'm with you. Well said.

No Jeb. No Newt. No Mitt. No Huckster, no RINO's. Same at the local Fed and State levels.

Deborah D| 7.9.09 @ 11:46AM

Ran and Basil -- Right on!!

"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice."
Thomas Paine

You, sirs, have views with the best of our Founders. God bless.

Lynn D.| 7.9.09 @ 12:05PM

No Fred, Sarah, Newt, Jeb, Huckabee, Mitt or anyone we know currently! We need a complete outsider or I will vote for a third party candidate. Maybe someone with similar values to Ron Paul will run again. He, or someone like him, would do a lot better the next time around after the mess this country has become.

Old Texican| 7.9.09 @ 12:20PM

Ran, Basil Well spoken.

A couple of thoughts:

Bush derangement syndrome has become too endemic to give Jeb a chance...even if he were everything we conservatives could hope for.

Second,
We truly do need to break the chain of aristocracy developing in this country.

Grzmlyk| 7.9.09 @ 12:43PM

Old Texican, I hope you are right - it would be the one gift that Bush Derangement Syndrome has finally visited on conservatives.

But odious "moderates" - the spineless jellyfish who think that it's just okie dokie to be de facto democrats in the pursuit of "victory" (and what a hollow "victory" it always is) like perennial b-lister Tucker Carlson, turncoats David Frum, David Brooks, Peggy Noonan, et al, will be singing their siren songs of capturing independents and emerging powerhouse bloc hispanics.

That means pushing feckless Republicans to the fore like the above-mentioned Mitt, Newt, Huck, and, of course, 2008's spectactular dud McCain.

I really hope someone emerges with the game-changing ability of a Reagan or a Thatcher. If, that is, elections are permitted in 2012.

John - TMF| 7.9.09 @ 1:23PM

There was a man who on principle would not purchase or use a cell phone... He hated them, despised them with all his might, insisted that he never needed a cell phone, and would never use one no matter what.

One day the man's car bottomed out in a nasty pothole while driving to work. He had a massively important meeting that he needed to get to, but there wasn't any way for him to get in touch with his office...

He spied a phone booth on the corner, resolved to call the tow truck for his damaged car, and get in contact with his office to delay the meeting.

He reached the booth, only to find an evil looking pile of something that he didn't want to think of in the bottom... and then noted that the phone handset was missing.

He sprinted across the parking lot, to the convince store on the corner. He got to the counter and asked the clerk for a phone. The clerk blankly stared at him while pointing at a sign (no calls - for emergencies only).

The man, sighed, looked up and spotted an old phone booth in the back of the store. He made his way to the back and picked up the hand set... he read the card on the front of the machine... the call required fifty cents!!! He fished in his pockets and found but a nickle and some lint.

Despondent, he felt a gentle poke in the middle of his back... It was a beautiful little girl in ringlet curls and a wide smile on her face. She was handing him a pink glitter covered squarish object....

"Mister, if you need to call your mommy, you can do it on mine, did you lose yours? I lose mine sometimes... its okay..."

Take it anyway you need to.

r/TMF

bigskybob| 7.9.09 @ 1:33PM

Why should conservatives "hope" for a conservative Presidential candidate? Why not simply find a conservative candidate, and support him. Colburn, DeMint and Palin might fit that bill, Gingrich, Bush III, Thompson, Forbes and Huckabee do not.

A special place in political Hell should be reserved for ideological whores like Mitt Romney. That conservatives don't see him as the idealogical fraud that he is beyond me.

As long as moderates can profess to be conservative with impunity, the Republican party will never nominate a conservative, and elections will continue to be a choice between tweedle-dee and tweedle-are.

Angel| 7.9.09 @ 2:18PM

Hey, Lynn--SARAH PALIN FOR PRESIDENT 2012!!

bigskybob--I like the way you think! A special place in political Hell for moderates sounds good to me--you listening, RINO/Obama sycophant Bob?

Bill| 7.10.09 @ 6:32PM

Forget about Neocon Newt! Remember how he switched from not supporting the bailouts last fall, to supporting them? He also threw his support for NAFTA, GATT, and the WTO. The man is a globalist just like the Bush's.