Quote:
Originally posted by mml
In an attempt to get this back on target, would some of the more conservative members give us their take on President Bush? I am curious, as most of my conservative friends have a real "love/hate" feeling about him. I get the feeling that the only reason they are standing by him is that he is a Republican(just like many Democrats couldn't have cared less who got the nomination, they just want to beat Bush).
|
While I can't speak for all other "conservatives", I do not support Bush simply because he is a Republican. In fact, most of what he does is not strictly "Republican" and I agree with the moves. I neither love nor hate Bush, I accept him for his beliefs and the beliefs that I am most concerned with tend to agree with his.
I agree with the drug benefit for seniors. While it's not in a perfect form, it is a benefit that will help people that need it. Going forward the rules can be massaged and worked to help more people. Working in the pharmaceutical industry I know what it can cost for common and not so common treatments.
I agree with his administration's stand on the supposed "outsourcing" that's going on. It does not warrant government regulation and most attempts to mitigate global employment market effects that only impact a relative few industries will fail, hurting American companies in those industries, and opening all US industries up for retribution for any protectionist policies enacted.
I absolutely agree with an aggressive stand against terrorism. The US reputation on terrorism pre-9/11 was one of weakness and no terrorist group or terrorist supporting government feared suffering significant consequences from funding or directly attacking and killing US citizens. At worst (as evidenced by Iraq) a country would face some economic sanctions, leaders would remain in power, their bank accounts would grow, other coutnries would ignore the sanctions or continue to trade for "humanitarian" purposes. 30 years of pacifism in the face of terrorism has only served to allow terrorist networks to grow and worm their way into all manner of business and government. It's time to take a different tack and cause them to feel repercussions.
Pushing back against those countries who claim to be our "allies" yet continually prove they will put even their slightest of interests over the interests of the US and the world is appropriate.
Tax cuts are good. Tax cuts are appropriate. The government is inefficient when it comes to spending our money, gauging benefits of longstanding programs, ending programs that have outlived their usefullness, etc, etc, etc. Throwing more money into the pot to be wasted is unacceptable to me. Without a doubt funding cuts need to be the next step but that does not mean we should continue to allow Congress to reach into our pockets to pay for these inefficient, unproductive, or useless projects in the interim.
His plan for offering illegal immigrant workers a chance to go "legit" is decent. Not spectacular but it moves things in the right direction. I would gladly trade a hundred unproductive and lazy American workers (not that I think this is the norm, but we all know plenty who contribute nothing and still bitch about how they are unfairly treated or go unrecognized) for a single motivated "illegal" worker. I have known plenty of migrant workers from Central America from my days as a farmer and the vast majority of them were hard working, upbeat, responsible, and, in general, great people. They deserve the chance to be a legitimate part of our society. Hell, half of them deserve it more than me.