We all know that Bush is one of the most stubborn presidents that we've ever had. He never, ever, changes his political views. This stubbornness is what allowed him to attack Kerry's "flip-flop" with huge success. So it is strange to see the conservatives trying to claim that Bush is not a real conservative today, but only 3 years ago still claiming that he was the 2nd coming of Reagan. So which is it? Is he a conservative or is he not? Nice article on Salon by Glenn Greenwald: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/06/04/fraud/index.html ... One of the few propositions on which Bush supporters and critics agree is that George Bush does not change and has not changed at all over the last six years. He is exactly the same. And none of the supposed grounds for conservative discontent -- especially Bush's immigration position -- is even remotely new. Bush's immigration views have been well-known since before he was first elected in 2000, yet conservatives have devoted to him virtually cult-like loyalty and support. Just logically speaking, Bush's immigration views cannot be the cause of the flamboyant conservative "rebellion" against Bush since those views long co-existed with intense conservative devotion to Bush. There is really only one thing that has changed about George W. Bush from the 2002-2004 era when conservatives hailed him as the Great Conservative Leader, and now. Whereas Bush was a wildly popular leader then, which made conservatives eager to claim him as their Standard-Bearer, he is now one of the most despised presidents in U.S. history, and conservatives are thus desperate to disassociate themselves from the President for whom they are solely responsible. It is painfully obvious there is nothing noble, substantive or principled driving this right-wing outburst; it is a pure act of self-preservation. Any doubts about that ought to be easily resolved by the following: Jonah Goldberg, May 29, 2007 (Bush approval rating - 32%) Bush, The Liberal [Jonah Goldberg] Richard Cohen discovers something some of us on the right have been saying for a while: if you hold your head just so and look at Bush from the right angle, he looks an awful lot like a liberal. Jonah Goldberg, November 8, 2003 (Bush approval rating - 60%) But it is now clear that Bush's own son takes far more after his father's old boss than he does his own father, at least politically speaking. From tax cuts (and deficits, alas), to his personal conviction on aborrtion (sic), to aligning America with the historical tide of liberty in the world, Georrge (sic) W. Bush has proved that he's a Reaganite, not a "Bushie." He may not be a natural heir to Reagan, but that's the point. The party is all Reaganite now. What better sign that this is now truly and totally the Gipper's Party than the obvious conversion of George Bush's own son? Rush Limbaugh, November 8, 2006 (Bush approval rating -- 31%): Liberalism didn't win anything yesterday; Republicanism lost. Conservatism was nowhere to be found except on the Democratic side. . . . Conservatism did not lose, Republicanism lost last night. Republicanism, being a political party first, rather than an ideological movement, is what lost last night. Rush Limbaugh, July 7, 2004 (Bush approval rating -- 55%): Reagan was right just as George W. Bush is today, and I really believe that if Reagan had been able he would have put his hand on Bush's shoulder and say to him, "Stay the course, George." I really believe that. Bob Novak, March 26, 2007 (Bush approval rating - 32%): With nearly two years remaining in his presidency, Bush is alone. In half a century, I have not seen a president so isolated from his own party in Congress -- not Jimmy Carter, not even Richard Nixon as he faced impeachment. Bob Novak, March 24, 2003 -- (Bush approval rating - 65%): [Bush is] a president who may be more basically conservative than Ronald Reagan. National Review's Rich Lowry, January 28, 2007 (Bush approval rating - 33%): It is, in all seriousness, it is a distressing and depressing time to be a conservative. I'm reminded of the old saying by Mao -- things are always darkest before they go completely black. In recent years, we have watched a Republican Congress disgrace itself with its association with scandal, with its willful lack of fiscal discipline, and with its utter disinterest in the reforms that America needs. And at the same time, we watched a Republican President abet or passively accept the excesses of his Congressional party and, more importantly, fail to take the steps - until perhaps now - fail to take the steps to win a major foreign war. . . . National Review Editorial, Rich Lowry Editor, October 22, 2004 (Bush approval rating - 52%): In his bid for reelection, George W. Bush deserves the support of conservatives. . . . Bush has shown evidence of being able to learn from his mistakes. We have made political strides in Iraq. . . . Bush deserves conservative support, as well, on domestic issues. . . It has been a long and difficult four years, largely as a result of events not of Bush's making. For conservatives, however, backing Bush's reelection should be an easy decision.