|
|
May 22, 2006The Essential President BushA much-esteemed, long-neglected friend sent an email this morning, which was delightful to recieve. At one point he mentioned this post from yesterday and wrote: I think (President Bush) has lost his bearings. but then, so did Moses from time to time, it’s quite understandable. That made me wonder a little - has President Bush lost his bearings, or have we? Is it President Bush who has broken faith with “his base” or have they? When I read my friend’s line, I thought of a line from Pride and Prejudice, in which Elizabeth Bennett says in new appreciation of Mr. Darcy, “In essentials, I believe, he is very much what he ever was.” Perhaps I am a dim bulb, but President Bush has never surprised me, and that is probably why I have never felt let down or “betrayed” by him. He is, in essentials, precisely who he has ever been. He did not surprise me when he managed, in August of 2001, to find a morally workable solution in the matter of Embryonic Stem Cells. He did not surprise me when, a month later, he stood on a pile of rubble and lifted a broken city from its knees. When my FDNY friends told me of the enormous consolation and strength he brought to his meetings with grieving families, I was not surprised. When the World Series opened in New York City and the President was invited to throw the first pitch, there was no surprise in his throwing (while wearing body armor) a perfect strike. He did not surprise me when he spoke eloquently from the National Cathedral, or again before the Joint Houses of Congress, when he laid out the Bush Doctrine. He did not surprise me when he did it again at West Point, or when he went visionary at Whitehall (Lauri points out the video can be found at this link. It’s worth watching!) There were no surprises in President Bush’s invasion of Afghanistan to battle AlQaeda. There were no surprises when he went after an Iraq which everyone believed had WMD, an Iraq that had tried to assassinate an American President, an Iraq whose NYC consul did not lower its flag to half-mast after 9/11. Actually, there was one surprise. He did surprise me by going back to the UN, and back to the UN, in that mythical “rush to war” we heard so much about. But then again, the effort in Iraq was never as “unilateral” as it had been painted. President Bush did not surprise me when, faced with the scorn of “the world community” and those ever-ready A.N.S.W.E.R. marches which sprang up condemning him and Tony Blair, he stood firm. A lesser man, a mere politician, would have folded under such enormous pressure. I was not surprised when Bush did not. (Aside - it’s funny how they just can’t get a good-sized crowd together for those protests these days, innit? Everything about Iraq was “wrong” and everything about Iraq is “failure and quagmire” and yet, somehow, we all breathe a sigh of relief that the job is done, that Saddam is out of power and that Iraq, save a very small piece of troubled land, is - in remarkably short order (and despite the wild pronouncements of John Murtha) - tasting its first morsels of democracy and liberty, and showing promise.) It never surprised me that Yassar Arafat, formerly the “most welcomed” foreign “Head of State” in the Clinton White House was not welcomed - ever - to the Bush White House. I wasn’t surprised by the, not one, but two tax cuts he got passed through congress, or the roaring economy - and jobs - those tax cuts created. I wasn’t surprised when he killed the unending farce that is the Kyoto treaty (remember, the thing Al Gore and the Senate unanimously voted down under Clinton?), or when he killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court, or when he told the UN they risked becoming irrelevent, or when he told the Congress and the world, “America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country.” Not surprising.
I wasn’t surprised at all to watch him - in a foreign and hostile land - go rescue the Secret Service agent who was being detained and kept from protecting him. Or to see him shoot his cuffs, afterwards, and greet his host with a smile. I was never surprised that he tried to “change the tone” or tried reaching across the aisle to invite onesuch as Ted Kennedy to help draft education reform, something none of his predecessors dared touch. Just as they never dared to try to reform social security or our energy policies. The feckless ones in Congress wouldn’t get the jobs done, unfortunately, but he is a president who at least tried to get something going on those “dangerous” issues. His senior prescription plan was unsurprising and it is helping lots of people. I was not at all to surprised to see President Bush forego the “trembling lip photo-op” moment in which most world-leaders indulged after the Christmas Tsunami of 2004 in order to get real work done, to bring immediate help to that area by co-ordinating our own military (particularly our Naval support) with Australia and Japan. Stupid, stingy American. I was surprised, actually, to see him dance with free Georgians. I didn’t think he danced.
Let me tell you what has surprised me about George W. Bush. I have been surprised by his ability to keep from attacking-in-kind the “public servants” in Washington who - for five years - have not been able to speak of the American President with the respect he is due, by virtue of both his office and his humanity, because they are entralled with hate and owned by opportunism. I have been surprised that he has kept his committment to “changing the tone” even when it has long been clear that the only way the tone in Washington will ever change is if everyone named Bush or Clinton or Kennedy is cleared out and “career politicians” are shown the door and - it must be said - every university “School of Journalism” is converted to a daisy garden, maaaan. We are stardust. We are golden. I wasn’t surprised when President Bush thought that New Orleans had dodged a bullet after Hurricane Katrina, and therefore let down his guard. After all, we all thought NOLA had done so. I wasn’t surprised that he had - similarly to his actions the year before, re Hurricane Charlie - asked the Democrat Governor of Louisiana (and the Mayor) to order evacuations and suggested to her that she put the issue under Fed control to speed up processes (she did not, btw for a long while). But I was surprised that, when the press “picked and choosed” their stories while launching an unprecedented, emotion-charged, often completely inaccurate (10,000 bodies!) attack on the President - the rising waters were all his fault and he was suddenly “the uncaring racist attempting genocide by indifference” - the President did not fight back against the sea of made-up news and boilerplate, fantastic charges against him.
I was surprised, and what surprised me was the sense I had that Bush’s heart was broken. That he had done everything he could to keep faith with the nation, and that he could not believe that in a time of such terrible need, all some people could think of was, “how do we use this politically, how do we break Bush with this?” It can’t have helped that some of the hysteria was coming from the right as well as the left. Things changed after that, didn’t they? The press and the left doubled up their attacks, the far-right went very smug, and President Bush never has seemed to have regrouped his spirit. A month later, I wasn’t surprised (although some - mostly the hard-right “I’m a Conservative before I’m anything and he’d better serve me” types - clearly were) when he nominated Harriett Miers to the SCOTUS. In fact, I’d predicted it. Up until that moment, every person President Bush had nominated to pretty much any position had won accolades from the beamish far-right, but Miers did not. She wasn’t one of their guys or gals. She wasn’t Luttig, she wasn’t Rogers-Brown. Harriet Miers? Damn that Bush! The denouncements came fast and furious and suddenly “the base” with which George W. Bush had not broken faith…broke faith with him. Suddenly they were as willing to call him a moron and an idiot as any KozKid. Imagine that. Imagine being the guy who has given his base one splendid nominee after another, in all manner of posts, make a nomination he thinks appropriate only to find that “base” coming out with both guns, defaming his nominee and directing all manner of insult at himself. President Bush is nothing if not loyal; his loyalty is often his downfall. When he asked for a little trust (which he had surely earned) a little loyalty and a little faith, from “the base,” he got kicked in the groin, over and over again, for daring to think differently, for falling out of lockstep with his policy-wonk “betters.” That had to be bitter, for him. At that point Bush, unchanged in essentials, might have wondered if his conservative “base” had become a bit over-confident and loose-hipped, so cock-sure of their majority (not that congress used it) so certain of their own brilliance that they were beginning to believe they didn’t need him; that he wasn’t conservative enough, after all, and that the next president was going to be the solid, “uncompassionate” conservative they’d really wanted all along. The president who had delivered one gift after another to his base asked them to trust him, and his base sneered. Then of course, the DPW debacle was launched and once again the far-right, his “base” went beserk, again, for very dubious reasons. Buster was the one who pointed out to me, then, that in this matter President Bush was being entirely consistent with who he had always been and that his defense of the sale was not unsound, nor unprecedented. The right didn’t care! They stomped their feet and went DU again. Even Rush Limbaugh couldn’t control them. The left, on the other hand, which should have supported the president - they would have had he been anyone else - simply exploited what they could of it. And now, the Great Big Immigration Imbroglio of ‘06 has turned “the base” quite vicious. President Bush is no longer simply a moron or an idiot to his base, he is a bad man. He is a bad American. He is a bad president. Everything he does now, is wrong. As yesterday’s WSJ pointed out, Bush is closer to the deified Ronald Reagan on this issue than anyone on the right wants to admit. And they’d never do to Reagan what they are doing to Bush. Let’s look at a few Reagan quotes on the nature of those “far-right” conservatives, mmkay? ‘When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn’t like it. ‘Compromise was a dirty word to them and they wouldn’t face the fact that we couldn’t get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don’t get it all, some said, don’t take anything. ‘I’d learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: ‘I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.’ ‘If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that’s what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.’ Mr. Reagan, I salute you. I did not vote for you. Twice. I came too late to appreciation of you. But sir, some of us have been saying the same thing to “the base” for a few weeks now. They’re still not listening. They won’t, I imagine, until they absolutely must. And perhaps it will take a staggering defeat for that to happen. President Bush’s immigration policies have not changed materially since he was Governor of Texas. You folks knew that when you elected him, twice. He has not changed, cannot change, because his policies arise not from his poll numbers but from his convictions and his conscience. You used to love that about him. Can everything, everything that needs to be done BE done, and all as you would have it done, in the real world, a world of bitter partisanship and a corrupted press? Some say that the GOP should consider “losing in ‘06 to win in ‘08.” Some conservatives say that they’re going to not vote - to sit out an election or vote for a third party candidate to “teach the GOP a lesson.” The far-right gwwwwarks like a cracker-obsessed parrot: Bush has abandoned the base, he’s abandoned the base, he’s abandoned the base. Ever stop to think maybe the president feels his base has abandoned him, that uncontent with 75%, they’ve simply moved beyond reason? Ever stop to think that while you’re calling the president every despicable name in the book and demanding his fealty or you’ll “teach him a lesson,” that perhaps there is a lesson you need to learn? That a good man, disinterested in merely laughing or crying for the camera for 8 years and looking to do a difficult job in the face of unprecedented hate, unprecedent speed of communication, unprecedented global instability, unprecedented backstabbing from within his own CIA, deserves some loyalty and the benefit of a doubt as he tries to bring you the 75% you so callously spit back at him as insufficient? We do not know everything we think we know. Nothing is static; everything is in flux, and it is very likely that more is at work here, on many levels, than any of us can dream. There are things seen and unseen. Think about it. Here is a question, and I’ll be writing on it some more during the week, but start thinking about it, now: HOW DO YOU RECEIVE A GOOD? How you receive a good has a lot to do with whether any more “good” comes your way. The Conservatives got a “good” in 2000 and 2004; they’re receiving it very badly, indeed. I think the throwing-under-the-bus-of-George-W-Bush by “the base” is one of the most shameful things I have ever witnessed in all my years of watching politics, from both sides of the political spectrum. How do you receive a good? President Bush has never surprised me. He is, in essentials, the man he ever was. It does not surprise me that he is a Christian man living a creed before he is a President, that he is a President before he is a Conservative. It seems to me precisely the right order of things. You don’t have to agree with everything President Bush does; I don’t. But he deserves a lot better than he’s getting from his own side. He deserves, dare I say it, a spirit of compromise and workability, as opposed to the hard-line demand for a “perfect” solution (one which will never pass congress) to a problem no one else in government has even dared to address.
Related: Ed Morrissey, commenting on this WaPo piece I hadn’t even seen, echos a similiar thought about the unchanging Bush. Rick Moran is on the same wavelength with a good piece Alexandra has a sound piece up which reminds us of what Natan Sharansky thinks of President Bush. Bruce Kesler still thinks it’s fatigue. Mr. Tapscott remains unconvinced.Called as Seen has a series of related posts looking at what this is doing to the right and he is very rough indeed, on some of us. Much more so than me…I just glitter! Bernard, unsurprisingly, disagrees with me and finds that this immigration issue trumps all else, but he does it in his characteristically generous and gentlemanly way. Prof. Bainbridge prepares to be blamed for a November disaster. I am inclined to ask, once more time, that my far-right conservative friends pull back from a hoary edge. Michael Novak calls Bush, The Bravest President. I think that’s about right. WELCOME: Lucianne.com readers! While you’re here, please look around. In the past 24 hours or so we’re discussed Lorie Byrd’s new nest, whether guilt and shame don’t have their place, we’ve continued our tireless admiration for Bryn Terfel’s musical gifts, taken issue with assertions about new media, pondered the most dangerous prayer you can pray and I’ve shared a little of my brother-in-law’s decision to go to hospice. Also, a round-up of blog posts and news storys from today is at the top. http://theanchoressonline.com/2006/05/22/the-essential-president-bush/trackback/ 91 Responses to “The Essential President Bush” |
The gang at 
May 22nd, 2006 at 11:49 am
Brava, Anchoress, BRAVA!!!
I thought my husband and I were the only ones who felt this way. Nice to see that we are in such excellent company. Thanks for this post.
May 22nd, 2006 at 12:56 pm
Whoa Anchoress!! I have my disagreements with President Bush over immigration, but his take on it is better than the House and Senate’s. In his favor, Bush is having to confront YEARS of footdragging on this issue by all the parties and no matter what he does he will be damned by some.
I’ll continue to pray for him and our country - we need it.
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:09 pm
I agree, Anchoress. I think President Bush is one the truest, most honorable and principled men to occupy the White House in many years. In fact, he may well be the only person in America that cares about the immigrants without regard to some ulterior politcal or economic motive.
That’s what makes it so damn hard to part company here with this good man. Maybe devorcing someone is hardest when you don’t hate him.
You can undo an ill-advised law about taxes or energy or the budget or this or that. You can’t undo the consequences of the Bush/Senate immigration reform.
Yes, we’re a nation of immigrants. But after we all got off the boat, we were popped into to a militantly nationalistic public school system that converted us all into 100% red blooded Americans, as they used to say.
Well, that process hasn’t worked in years, and you can thank pc for that.
And until we get it working again, until we can make the country sturdy in spirit again, I have to stand against the President–and you, I guess.
But may I still wave to you from across no-man’s land?
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Hey, no one ever accused me of being unsocialble…well, actually they HAVE accused me of being unsociable, as I am very shy…but I never, never let politics get in the way of a good pal-ship!
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:35 pm
[...] The Anchoress has published today a passionate, largely well-thought, heavily linked, and, true to her customary facility with the King’s English, eloquently written defense of President George Bush. I heartily recommend it to you. There is much in her post that we all need to be reminded of that has been right about George W. Bush’s presidency. [...]
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:37 pm
Anchoress, You are a blessing. You eloquently express what I feel. My heart is also broken that this good man is so maligned from all sides. I pray for him daily. I hope his family has his back and props him up when he gets down as surely he must. He takes the hits because he believes what he believes. Such a one as this will not come around again soon.
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:41 pm
I couldn’t agree more. Excellent discussion of the character of the President.
May 22nd, 2006 at 2:57 pm
Great post!
In fact, you summed it it nicely a few days ago when you noted that the president represents all Americans and his mandate exceeds that of pleasing and satisfying his ‘base’ only.
It is hubris that by many on either side of the political spectrum that denies that truth.
To this day, Mr Bush has given me no reason to distrust him or his motives.
True, he is a politician, constricted by the ‘rules of the game.’ That said, he remains a decent man, guided by decent ideals.
May 22nd, 2006 at 3:09 pm
he remains a decent man, guided by decent ideals
.
More than that, he is a man of faith. Left to himself, a mere man would crumble and give in to resentment, telling his so-called friends to go f*** themselves, but then the need for approval would cause him to simply follow the public opinion polls. Thankfully, Bush is not “all by himself” — he has faith, he has the grace of Christ to take all these arrows and remain true to his cause of doing the right thing.
.
Maybe his exposure to Catholicism has had an effect on him, because, although not the pope, he has clearly seen the need to be “a rock,” to refuse to give in to the winds and storms, and to always stand firm.
May 22nd, 2006 at 3:24 pm
I’ve have actually dropped some old favorites from my Favorites because of their relentless attacks on the President–not on his policies, but on the man himself.
Thanks, dear Anchoress, for expressing so beaurifully what I’ve been feeling.
May 22nd, 2006 at 3:53 pm
You can’t get all of what you want.
The Anchoress has an excellent post today. I am in total agreement with her. She puts it so much more eloquently than I.May 22, 2006The Essential President Bush A much-esteemed, long-neglected friend sent an email this morning, which was delightful
May 22nd, 2006 at 5:22 pm
Thank you so much.
May 22nd, 2006 at 5:39 pm
I just LOVE you for writing this! Wonderful, exactly what I think too (as usual!).
May 22nd, 2006 at 5:43 pm
[...] The Anchoress has a rather long, but important, post that asks the question: Has George Bush abandoned his conservative base, or is it the other way around? Consider this excerpt: Ever stop to think maybe the president feels his base has abandoned him, that uncontent with 75%, they’ve simply moved beyond reason? Ever stop to think that while you’re calling the president every despicable name in the book and demanding his fealty or you’ll “teach him a lesson,” that perhaps there is a lesson you need to learn? That a good man, disinterested in merely laughing or crying for the camera for 8 years and looking to do a difficult job in the face of unprecedented hate, unprecedent speed of communication, unprecedented global instability, unprecedented backstabbing from within his own CIA, deserves some loyalty and the benefit of a doubt as he tries to bring you the 75% you so callously spit back at him as insufficient? [...]
May 22nd, 2006 at 5:54 pm
Dedicated to Reaganite, who has stood his ground.
The Anchoress
The Essential President Bush
A much-esteemed, long-neglected friend sent an email this morning, which was delightful to recieve. At one point he mentioned this post from yesterday and wrote: I think (President Bush) has lost his bearings…
May 22nd, 2006 at 6:22 pm
Excellent post as usual, Dear A. However, I have noted that the concern of several of the Usual Conservative Suspects is driven from their fear of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. And the fact that Mr. Bush–so stalwart in defending Iraq and Afghanistan–seems to be overly concerned with appeasing Mr. Fox.
.
Why? The accommodation of the millions of illegals, especially those from Mexico, has made the U.S. an “enabler” in the AA sense, allowing the Mexican Government to avoid the hard work of cleaning the corruption in their own government and building their own country’s infrastructure and economy. Mexico is a land rich in natural resources, has a tradition of education, and whose people (as we in the U.S. can attest) are willing and able to work hard.
.
Why does Mr. Bush continue to enable Mexico? His actions don’t make sense to me and his administration’s fatal flaw is the inability to communicate his ideas and his vision directly to his constituents.
.
Tell me your vision, Mr. President! Give me some idea of where you see us, America, in the next ten years, or 20, or 50! I want to believe–but I can’t do it on just your word that “It will all work out.”
May 22nd, 2006 at 6:31 pm
The Anchoress
The Anchoress says, in her usual calm and eloquent way, exactly what I’ve been thinking: That made me wonder a little - has President Bush lost his bearings, or have we? Is it President Bush who has broken faith with
May 22nd, 2006 at 6:34 pm
Anchoress:
Thank you for the post….. and for all those people out there obsessing about immigration to the point of lunacy..where were you a decade ago? Why is it all of a sudden that you lose all reason on this issue? Bush is actually confronting it and trying to get something done. Left to one of the “base” the status quo, illegals and all would probably go on indefinetly, just like it always has.
I don’t even think a lot of these people listened to the President when he talked about immigration, they just kept right on blowing off as if they had some special insight that Bush does not.
Why should an Independent like me ever trust or believe this base? After all, they have proven how shallow they really are.
May 22nd, 2006 at 6:44 pm
March Hare:
Enabling Mexico?? That is absurd. 80% of the agricultural workers in much of California are Mexican migrants, they are enabling you to eat. Not all these people are on welfare or criminals or drug dealers. It seems to me that certain people on the right are bound and determined to reinforce every antiRepublican sterotype out there. Yes, Mexico is a mess. News flash…. it always has been. But Fox is not Chavez.
Does it never occur to people that if it was all half as simple as they say it is… that there is no reason at all that this whole situation should not have been dealt with decades ago?
May 22nd, 2006 at 6:56 pm
Thank you, thank you dear Anchoress. You are so right when you say that he is exactly who we knew him to be all along. He never tried to make us believe differently on this or any issue. I think he ‘calls them like he sees them’. I think the man is true to his conscience and to what he believes is best for this country, to his political peril, I’m afraid. I sincerely hope history sees him for who he is and not for what he’s been made out to be by the press and his fellow conservatives. After all, he campaigned on compassionate conservatism. What did people think that meant, after all?
May 22nd, 2006 at 8:41 pm
[...] The Anchoress has a must read. I haven’t awarded a Golden Hammer Award in a while but now it’s time. See for yourself. Here is a sample……… [...]
May 22nd, 2006 at 9:02 pm
Anchoress, you write so well that the only thing I can think of to say after reading your posts is: Amen.
May 22nd, 2006 at 10:02 pm
Quick Links
After a long interview, here are a few links to other bloggers working late into the night: Lorie Byrd has found a new home at Wizbang! She has her first welcome post up there now. I think they’re both lucky…
May 22nd, 2006 at 10:38 pm
[...] As usual The Anchoress hits the nail on the head when it comes to Bush: A much-esteemed, long-neglected friend sent an email this morning, which was delightful to recieve. At one point he mentioned this post from yesterday and wrote: I think (President Bush) has lost his bearings. but then, so did Moses from time to time, it’s quite understandable. [...]
May 22nd, 2006 at 11:30 pm
Beautifully said and I couldn’t agree more! When I disagree with a member of MY team, I simply tell them what I would do. I don’t start kicking over everything in the room and threaten to never support them again, or throw my support to their enemies. We are at War. Not only on the field of comabat, but here at home. The MSM launched another offensive this weekend to hurt the US economy. See those headlines “Is the market DUE for another catastropic correction?” Ahh, no..it isn’t. Almost all the change in inflation is due to higher energy prices–more than at any other time in history. Plus those price increases are due to a run-up in the futures market, not any supply and demand concerns. Trying to help your Dem buddies, MSM? After ignoring all the positive economic news of the last two years? Disgusting! And the Wapo coming out with that headline about the Republicans’ future hinging on the next election? It doesn’t for the Democrats? Hmmm? Maybe we need a new trend in the US—’Wrote Rage”–where readers tar and feather MSM writers who insult their intelligence. And work against the best interests of this country. I’m glad I am not a Democrat today, with my success pinned to everything negative that could happen to my country and trying to make that a reality. I’d like to think that if I were I would be thinking about doing what’s best for my country now…Checking on my immigration application to Canada. Or something more permanent.
May 23rd, 2006 at 12:53 am
[...] This one. It’s one of the most beautifully written, heartfelt posts I have seen in a long time, but that’s the beauty of the Anchoress–she writes so well. An excerpt: Let me tell you what has surprised me about George W. Bush. I have been surprised by his ability to keep from attacking-in-kind the “public servants” in Washington who - for five years - have not been able to speak of the American President with the respect he is due, by virtue of both his office and his humanity, because they are entralled with hate and owned by opportunism. I have been surprised that he has kept his committment to “changing the tone” even when it has long been clear that the only way the tone in Washington will ever change is if everyone named Bush or Clinton or Kennedy is cleared out and “career politicians” are shown the door and - it must be said - every university “School of Journalism” is converted to a daisy garden, maaaan. We are stardust. We are golden. [...]
May 23rd, 2006 at 1:17 am
Anchoress, thanks for the beautiful trip down memory lane with President Bush and with you as our tour guide. This is a beautiful post that expresses everything I think of this wonderful president and more. This is one of your greatest works IMO. Thank you a million times over!
May 23rd, 2006 at 1:31 am
[...] “I think (President Bush) has lost his bearings. but then, so did Moses from time to time, it’s quite understandable.” [...]
May 23rd, 2006 at 1:56 am
Utterly fantastic, beautiful and meaningful. I completely agree with you about Bush, and the excess of conservative desire for Unreal Perfection — and disagree with Bush on immigration.
In fact, each and every conservative against Bush should be asked — where is your energy on the local Republican Primary, to get a better Republican candidate?
I’m afraid the Personality Bush-hate anti-cult of the media has infected Michelle Malkin & LaShawn Barber (who I read and enjoy and usually agree with), into being too critical of Bush.
Bush, or any “conservative” leader, needs supporters in Congress. The failure of conservative pundits to pressure big-spending Reps is a failure of the Republican “leader” as well as the pundits — and, like most folks, they want to blame Bush instead.
Prof. Bainbridge and Mark Tapscott should be scolded for taking the easy, lazy, “Bush only” approach to gov’t, and not fighting the longer, harder, “true conservatives” for Congress thru Rep primaries.
Just as the media focuses too much on America (not Darfur, Congo, China, Indonesia), it focuses too much on the President, not enough on the 100 Senators and 435 reps.
Most conservatives who feel betrayed by Bush have betrayed themselves by their own laziness/ busyness in other things.
Thanks again for your heart AND mind.
Please consider re-reading Rerum Novarum (115th anniversary last week).
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:05 am
Where were we ten years ago?
Pissed about illegal immigration, that’s where we were, and frustrated by the unwillingness of our state and national governments to do anything useful about it. Ever think that perhaps we elected Bush in spite of his immigration policies?
When the rest of the nation looked around in 2001 and went “Hey! The borders are open! This is not good.”, those of us who deal with unassimilated illegal aliens every day of our lives went “Gee, you think? Welcome to our world. Good luck getting anything done about it.”
So, in a general way, I’m not a bit surprised by Bush’s take on immigration. But with the added impetus of 9-11, I’d have thought he’d do something more forceful, so yeah, I am disappointed. But I haven’t turned on him - just having the same argument we were having in Texas 6 years ago.
Igout has it exactly right. I have mentioned here before that with illegal immigrants from Mexico we are not dealing with the same situation some of us see through a nostalgic Ellis Island “we are all immigrants” haze. Everyone’s heard the reasons, so I won’t repeat them.
Until every aspect of your life, from making a phone call to flipping the channels to ordering a hamburger to just walking into a store reminds you that you’re living in the midst of a whole lot of people who want the rewards, but not the responsibilities, of living here, then please refrain from pointing the finger at those of us who do and chiding us for our “uncharitableness”.
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:42 am
Followed the link here from the Lucianne.com Must Reads. Yep, A is still A! Congratulations, A.
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:20 am
[...] The Anchoress The Essential President Bush — “President Bush has never surprised me. He is, in essentials, the man he ever was. It does not surprise me that he is a Christian man living a creed before he is a President, that he is a President before he is a Conservative. It seems to me precisely the right order of things.” [This entire post is absolutely a must read. Jim] 24, Blogs and blogging, Hamas, Ibrahim Hamed, Identity theft, lorie byrd, President Bush, VA Trackback URL:http://brightandearlyblog.com/2006/05/first-cup-052306/trackback/ [...]
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:52 am
Re: the snarky attack on the base over the Miers nomination:
The Miers nomination and immigration are Bush’s two egregious failures — when the base refused to put up with Miers (thank God for true conservatives), we got Alito which will be a long-time benefit to the country — God only knows what Miers would have turned out like! Both decisions have decades-long consequences. At least future Congresses can ameliorate the drug benefit and even McCain-Feingold.
When our country becomes majority Hispanic by 2050, who knows what they will decide to enact — if we still have free elections by then. We’ll see if they cherish our founding ideals and the Bill of Rights — they won’t be taught to in our schools and they have no previous experience with either in Central America.
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:53 am
So, is the problem the Hispanic people, or the borders? Why isn’t anyone talking about the Canadian borders?
May 23rd, 2006 at 11:27 am
Both borders, of course. As well as both seacoasts.
The long-standing problem of Hispanic illegal aliens highlights the porousness of the border. They’re both issues, but to conflate the one with say, the Canadian border, is ingenuous relativity. Terror prevention-wise, they’re all important. Ports deal, anyone?
OTOH, the viable terror concerns re: borders in general have made the illegal alien problem more visible. That can only be good.
Who has more to lose from a total border closing - Canada or Mexico? And why might that be? Who has more elements inimical to the U.S.? Where does it make more sense to turn the bulk of our concern?
May 23rd, 2006 at 11:49 am
But then, we mustn’t forget, the Canadian border is where we have stopped so many terrorists from entering…maybe we should just put up a giant, giant wall on all four sides. That’s the ticket!
May 23rd, 2006 at 11:54 am
We have more to lose from a total border closing than either Canada or Mexico Sal. Those two countries are our biggest trade partners.
May 23rd, 2006 at 11:57 am
I think part of why Bush is trying to keep Mexico on his good side is because Hugo Chavez would like to bring it to his side…a communist Mexico would not be desirable to us.
May 23rd, 2006 at 12:15 pm
[...] The Anchoress today has a superb piece on The Essential President Bush that sprung from a friend's email. Just a taste - I think (President Bush) has lost his bearings. But then, so did Moses from time to time, it’s quite understandable. [...]
May 23rd, 2006 at 12:38 pm
Lucianne brought me here to read this wonderful piece. I cried as I read it. I wondered if I was the only one who remembered the strong, consistent, and good President who we voted for twice. I’m glad The Anchoress showed me others do remember. Bush campaigned about immigration reform in 2000. And though I don’t agree with everything he believes with this issue, I see a man who has the strengh to tackle this terrible issue. It is the media that has lost their bearings. Their Bush-hatred is so over-whelming, the vile from their pen or throat passes over me like hot gases from a stoked furnace. May voices like The Anchoress cool those vile gases and become the norm outside the ’sphere.
May 23rd, 2006 at 12:53 pm
Is It a Thankless Job?
The Essential President Bush
I don’t know. I suppose in sum, the American Presidency is a thankless job.
So . . . thank you, Mr. President.
…
May 23rd, 2006 at 1:27 pm
The Essential Bush
The Essential Bush
May 23rd, 2006 at 1:47 pm
[...] The Anchoress (who I am very remiss in linking to) has a great post asking the question of who is out of sink with whom? Is Bush off track or Rep leaders and talking heads? My two cents” Bush is one of the most consistent politicians I have ever seen. He says what he means and does what he says. he never gets side tracked by getting in the muck with his deranged critics. And he rightfully ignores the self absorbed whining from the media. He is 100 times better than any other politician out there. My feeling is left and right is drifting away from the ‘mainstream’. [...]
May 23rd, 2006 at 2:09 pm
The Essential President Bush
If you have not yet read The Essential President Bush by The Anchoress, read it now. It will remind even those that are not so happy with him right now, how much good this President has done, often in the…
May 23rd, 2006 at 3:18 pm
Sal:
Oh please, not long ago it was the Muslims were the enemy and now it is as if all the hispanics are the enemy. A majority by 2050? That is silly.
Bush has tried to fight the war on Terror and it is as if people got bored with that now they need a new enemy and so here we are talking about how the hispanics will take over and rule in less than a half century. This is nonsense. And besides, Bush is actually trying to deal with the problem, the hardliners are making demands that will never make it out of the Senate which means in the long run there will be no wall. So if it is all that damned important that we deal with this right now, why is the hard right trying to kill compromise and with it any hope of immigration reform?
May 23rd, 2006 at 3:23 pm
I agree. Part of the base has lost its bearings and it is the people you referred to. Its the “My way or the highway” crowd who are gleefully running fast forward into irrelevance by their refusal to come to the table with workable solutions. The love their “ideals” much more than governing.
You are to be saluted for a great posting and I’m glad that it has been well-received.
Bob Koeth
May 23rd, 2006 at 4:04 pm
Dearest A,
Brilliant, poignant, sober and sobering. You are voice of reason and a voice for reason.
I’ve long wondered why the president hasn’t just come out swinging, and I’ve wondered if he hasn’t just resigned himself to the murmurs that started with the Miers nomination and are now at volume 11, the low poll numbers and the daily media distortion. I know I’m getting close to that sort of resignation myself.
And I’m certain that if the right remains this divided come November, they will suffer a staggering loss in the Congressional elections. If the all-or-nothing wing of the GOP is dissatisfied now, imagine how happy they’ll be with Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and the impeachment hearings that surely must be already pencilled in for January 2007.
This cannot be what the ‘base’ wants. Those who do want to “show him” are showing a form of BDS themselves, becoming their own worst Kos/DU nightmares.
I fear deeply what we’re getting into here. But I don’t see the ‘All or Nothing’ wing as even willing to contemplate accepting less.
In the meantime, your writing skill has me, right now, raising my pint of Guinness in your direction, and my prayers in His direction for your brother-in-law.
May 23rd, 2006 at 5:01 pm
Terrye
I did not predict the percentage of Hispanics in 2050.
No one is suggesting that Hispanics are terrorists. We are pointing out that the ease with which aliens enter this country might encourage terrorists of whatever ilk.
At the same time, illegal immigration from Mexico is a national problem, irregardless of terrorism. It was a problem decades ago, and has gotten steadily worse since for a number of reasons.
They are related issues but not exactly the same.
I mispoke - when I said “closed borders’ I meant closed to illegal entrants, not to trade. I apologize for not being clearer.
To suggest that all the right have ignored this problem for decades is both incorrect and patronizing. As I mentioned above, this is an old argument we’re having with the President. Intense frustration often does lead to over-reaction.
May 23rd, 2006 at 5:14 pm
Well, I’ll tell you one thing, guys, I’m getting some substantial mail from Hispanics who are GOP’ers, who have worked on and contributed to GOP campaigns (a few I’ve long-corresponded with) and they’re starting to see a barely disguised bigotry under all of this. Whether it’s there or not is certainly debatable, but guess what, if it’s what they THINK they see, then whether it’s illusory or not, they will bolt.
‘
You have to watch it. There are a lot of conservatives now carrying on about “culture” and some are making big noise that the president has a “Mexican family,” in Jeb’s wife and kids. That doesn’t exactly come off like these angry folks are worrying about security. It comes off like they’re worrying about the brown people who don’t speak the lingo, and that will play into every stereotype of a bigoted conservative that you’ve ever heard. So will calling Bush Jorge Abushto. Folks may not “mean” to be racist. They come off as racist aplenty.
‘
The largest voting bloc on the horizon is watching all of this and thinking…those folks don’t want me, that’s for sure. I would suggest that the right take every pain, take every precaution, to prevent that impression from becoming fixed. As Rush would say, Words mean things.
May 23rd, 2006 at 6:19 pm
Dear Terrye,
.
I think you misunderstood what I meant by an “enabler.” In AA, an “enabler” is the one who allows the alcoholic or drug addict to continue his/her destructive behavior, usually by making excuses or covering for them. I believe that President Bush is doing much the same for Presidente Fox.
.
If the U.S. seriously enforced its current immigration laws and tightened up border security, the Mexican government would have to deal with their own governmental corruption. As things stand now, the U.S. is kind of like a pressure-release valve. Discontented Mexican citizens, rather than staying home and fighting to improve their lives there, come to the U.S. They send back to Mexico $20 billion dollars each year, making Mexican ex-patriates one of the largest sources of income for the Mexican Government, second only to oil exports.
.
Thus, the Mexican Government can ignore the festering problems at home, print graphic novels with instructions about how best to cross illegally into the U.S., threaten to sue the U.S. Gov’t for building a fence on its own soil.
.
Nationwide, the problem of illegal immigration might be recent. Here in California, a Governer was recalled because he authorized giving illegals driver’s licenses. Illegal immigration has been a huge problem in Southern California and has seriously impacted public services such as schools, hospitals, police, fire, parks, and public lands.
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:17 pm
Okay, sooooo what? You like GW?
Extremely well written, and thought-out piece, Anchoress. This is ‘a keeper’.
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:17 pm
[...] I ask this because of these two different pieces on the subject, here and here. [...]
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:53 pm
These folks get all “hepped up” and squeal when the bigot/xenophobe/nativist tag gets put on them, but I think its a label that fits them well. If they would read about what nativism looked like in the 19th century they would understand that the resembelance is strikingly similar.
The blinders are on pretty tight. IMHO
May 23rd, 2006 at 8:29 pm
We who disagree heartily with Bush on this issue are once again labeled “racist.” I notice that when Bush loyalists disagree with Bush dissenters, the loyalists quickly resort to name-calling. This happened over Harriet Miers (we were “sexist” then)and over immigration.
For people who supposedly support reasoned discourse and hearty political debate, the resort to name-calling to put down dissent is unworthy of the name “conservative.”
May 23rd, 2006 at 10:02 pm
Uh-huh, buckey1, but that was then. There are huge problems now with unregulated borders. The northern border needs work, yes, but the country up there - Canada - is not the economic/political basketcase that Mexico is.
All most of us are seeking is the assimilation of these people. I don’t want to hear a load of horse hockey about how they demand to keep their culture alive in the USA. If that culture is so darned positive for them, why is it a failure for the nation of Mexico?
They ain’t a-crossin’ the borders because the USA is worse, now are they?
Do I want Commies running things south of the border? ‘Course not! But the Tyrannical Socialist Autocracy that’s posing as a government there now ain’t exactly a real friend, either.
May 23rd, 2006 at 10:21 pm
President Bush and Emmanuel Goldstein
The Anchoress has a much needed perspective on President Bush. I am neither religious nor conservative, and yet I agree with the thrust of what she is …
May 23rd, 2006 at 11:55 pm
Bennning,