| the "conservative" pro-bush argument has been losing considerable steam. a while back, i'm sure you noticed how leading republican think-tanks began to distance themselves from bush. cato's been extremely vocal in their criticism. i've also seen a lot of criticism from heritage, which surprised me since they've always been fearless in showing their partisan colors.
that's understandable as bush's conduct in office is nowhere close to traditional republican or conservative ideals. the only conservative points he wins on are his bigoted social conservatism. he's clearly scoring big points making this election into a culture war - damn them fags. nothing fiscally conservative, he practices activist foreign interventionism and nation building (hardly conservative ideas), he supports amnesty for illegal immigrants, etc... nothing conservative about that either.
i think the reason why you see such a void in intellectual conservatives in the real world or online is because bush has not only contradicted conservative ideals, he has also contradicted his own. once upon a time he voiced complete support for the powell doctrine. then what does he do? sends us into a war that was not necessary and didn't include an exit strategy. his own "bush doctrine"... of all the countries that supports islamic terrorism, iraq was nowhere near the top of the list.
i think the crux of the pro-bush argument isn't to give strong intellectual arguments for bush's behavior, it's to demonize kerry because they cannot give strong intellectual arguments for bush's behavior. i.e. it's the only available option. after a while, thinking people get tired of making excuses in order to support a man and his unconservative policies. |