On the other hand, I saw a woman on the train ride home this evening holding a flyer titled "Wanted for crossing borders illegally: The Bush Regime". She held what I think was a Guatemalan flag in the other hand, so you can guess from which event she came.

But yes, her flyer accused Bush, et al., of hypocrisy. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't, I guess.

He has been a fairly poor president, but hey, you can't vote for him any more!

but hey, you can't vote for him any more!
nooooooooooooooooooo, i missed my chance. dammit.

But aren't there Republicans, in real life, who are saying those exact things about Bush?

These people think they're brilliant, outwitting us by simply pretending to be Republican and making the same irresponsible statements they make as Democrats. Nobody is stupid enough to fall for this routine though, so it makes Democrats seem rather bungling and silly.

But Bush *is* a betrayer of conservative principles; he's entirely abandoned the principles of limited government and giving powers to the states.

It shocks me that anyone doesn't have Stephen Silver's (above) reaction on the subject.

I question your patriotism, Joe.

Joe, I agree that Bush is not conservative enough. But leftists who want us to stay home on election day aren't looking to elect a federalist, know what I'm saying? I would still vote Bush over Kerry today, I imagine other Republicans would too. And there is no Republican who would 'never vote Republican again' because of Bush unless they're dumb as rocks and don't know that he is just one man and not the party.

My reaction, if and when I am unhappy with those Republicans in power, is to vote in DIFFERENT Republicans. Duh. Why would I vote for a Democrat because the Republican in office has been acting like a Dem (which is why I'm supposedly unhappy with them?) That is why these emails and arguments are bogus.

If the emails were real, they would say something to the effect of

"Vote in the Republican primaries so we can get better candidates on this issue"

not

"Do NOT vote Republican" so a lefty can get elected and make the problem ten times worse

TallDave:

Exactly. "Republican" and "Democrat" aren't the only options. There are also "Third Party" and, especially, "stay at home, because you're sick of politics."

Another option is to hold your nose and vote for Republican candidates while telling their fundraising telemarketer drones that they won't get a single thin dime until things start to change.

But Bush *is* a betrayer of conservative principles; he's entirely abandoned the principles of limited government and giving powers to the states.

If you mean Bush is not a single-minded ideologue, then you are right. He did not take an oath to preserve, protect and defend conservative principles, to the exclusion of all else.

But calling him "a betrayer of conservative principles" is a bit over the top.

He fought for pro-growth tax cuts, and is now fighting to make them permanent.

He instituted badly needed, accountability-based education reform (NCLB), while affirming the principle of local control of schools, rather than simply writing checks to the teachers' unions, as a Democrat would have done.

He proposed an innovative, market-based solution to the Social Security crisis. That it has not passed is thanks to the lack of vision and leadership in Congress (and the demagogery of the Democrats).

He passed market-based energy and environmental reforms.

His commitment to a strong national defense needs no further elaboration.

The conservative knocks against Bush, as far as I can tell are three:

1) Medicare prescription drug benefit
2) Harriet Miers
3) Guest worker program for immigration reform

Concerning #1, the President campaigned on the Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2000, so it should be no surprise that he did not renege on his campaign promise. The reform is a big entitlement program, certainly, but it is stupid to have Medicare without it, and there are market-based elements to it, although not to ideal extent one might have hoped. Passing legislation is about compromise, and the President got the best prescription benefit he could. A Democrat plan would not have been smaller or better.

Regarding #2, while the Miers nomination was a bad political misjudgment, the President believed he was nominating a conservative, and for all we know she was. I don't think he was trying to sneak a liberal judge onto the court. In any case, having made a mistake, the President corrected it nicely with Alito, who I don't think any conservative has a legitimate beef about. You can accuse him of bad judgment here, but not, I think, "betraying conservative principles".

Finally, there is immigration reform. While there are many conservatives opposed to a guest worker program, I do not see this as a benchmark conservative issue. Some reform is needed, and there is no point in proposing something which has no chance of passing. Again, when it gets down to brass tacks, you have to pass the best reform you can. The simple fact is that there is no way we can round up and deport 11 million people, even if we wanted to. Given that the illegal immigrants aren't going away, it makes sense to get as many of them as possible into some sort of legal status, so they pay taxes and are no longer totally outside the law. I respect those who disagree with the President's policy on immigration, but again I think it is better to support reforms that have a chance of passing, rather than to commit political suicide by holding out for something theoretically better but practically impossible.

Disagreeing with the president is one thing (and a necessary part of a democracy), but there is no reason (IMHO) to question his motives or to toss around inflammatory language like "betrayal", just because you disagree with certain policies.

On a conservative scale of 0-10, where 0 is Teddy Kennedy and Barbara Boxer, and a 10 is Ronald Reagan, I would rate Bush a 9. Not perfect, but if you think staying home on election day in November is going to result in more conservative policies coming out of Washington, or more conservative judges confirmed, or a stronger immigration policy, you will be in for an unpleasant surprise.

I would rank him more as a 6 or 7, but I would still vote for him over Kerry or Gore. Compared to them, he is a 15 or 20.

In Maryland, it happens at the voting polls. They are supposed to have one Republican and one Democrat voting judge (a civilian paid a stipend by the county, not a law judge) to oversee poll workers. The poll workers are supposed to be evenly divided among Republicans and Democrats. Interestingly, Republican volunteers can't find any polls to volunteer at, because they are all full of "republican"s. If you complain about voting irregularities (such as people helping non-English reading people vote, or voting for them while they stand outside), you get hasseled and eventually the cops show up.