by Frank James
It says something about the state of the White House's political antenna at this point in President Bush's second term that he was surprised by the fierce negative reaction within Republican Party's conservative circles to the way he criticized their opposition to the immigration compromise bill now before the Senate.
According to a Washington Times report today:
President Bush did not intend to single out his conservative supporters for criticism in a speech on immigration reform last week and was "surprised" that his remarks angered Republicans, White House spokesman Tony Snow said yesterday.
"He was surprised by the reaction," Mr. Snow said of Mr. Bush's speech in Glynco, Ga., last week. "The speech in Georgia was, 'We've got a serious problem, and we need to fix it.' It was not in any way designed to be pointed at Republicans."
But conservative opponents of a Senate immigration bill supported by Mr. Bush reacted furiously to the president's suggestion that they are resorting to scare tactics by using the word "amnesty" in referring to the measure that would allow millions of illegal aliens to remain in the United States.
"Those determined to find fault with this bill will always be able to look at a narrow slice of it and find something they don't like," Mr. Bush said in the May 29 speech about the legislation being debated in the Senate. "If you want to kill the bill, if you don't want to do what's right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it, you can use it to frighten people. Or you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all."
Some Republicans on Capitol Hill said that Mr. Bush seemed to be questioning their patriotism, and several conservative activists said the president was splitting the Republican Party by insulting those who have been his most loyal supporters…
It's hard to fathom how Bush, typically savvy when it comes to the political care and feeding of his political base, would think those words wouldn't outrage conservatives who oppose the immigration legislation as it's currently constructed.
Everyone knew whom he was talking about. It wasn't, obviously, the president's usual liberal Democratic foils like Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) since Kennedy was an important partne in helping the White House craft the legislation.
It's easy to see how the president got to this stage where he appeared to accuse his conservative immigration critics of lacking enough patriotism.
What he did to conservatives is similar to what he's long done to liberal critics of how he has waged the war on terror and the Iraq War.
With Democrats, he often has seemed to equate their criticism of his policies with a lack of enough patriotism or a critical failure to accurately understand the threats facing the nation. Rarely has he acknowledged that his critics on national security might have a point.
It's an approach that has worked for him since 9/11. So it wasn't much of a leap for him to work the concept into an immigration speech in which he took on the bill's conservative critics.
But while the president can obviously score points with conservatives when he appears to question the Democrats' patriotism or smartness on national security, he obviously only loses points with them when he attempts to out-patriot them. He can't.
Indeed, conservatives view many provisions in the bill as undermining national security. And they certainly see the legislation as undermining the rule of law. To their minds, anyone who supports the bill doesn't want to "do what's right for America," to use the president's own words.
The president find himself in a hornets' nest now domestically on immigration as he has overseas on Iraq, but the difference is he has lost big parts of his base on immigration while still holding onto it on the war, at least for now.
If he has any doubts of how bad it could get for him on immigration, all he need do is get a transcript of the speech Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) gave on the House floor last night.
Rohrabacker, who would find a lot of agreement within the Republican conservative base but not only there repeatedly referred to the immigration bill as "pro-invasion" and as the "Bush-Kennedy" bill. He said Bush was allied with the "elite" including big business who wanted to assure a steady stream of cheap labor. He said some of the 9/11 hijackers would have qualified for the "amnesty" the current proposal represents.
The president has a domestic insurgency on his hands. And his words last week aimed at conservatives were the equivalent of "Bring it on."
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Oh come on the Panderer in
Chief Liar George W Bush &
Amnesty Juan John McCain &
Teddy Kennedy are only doing what they do best!
And that is to Pander to the Cheap Labor US Chamber
Of Commerce,LaRaz and all the other special interest
group as they sell the American People out again
with their Leave No Illegal
Alien Behind Amnesty and
Cheap Labor Corporate Welfare Plan!
Posted by: Ralph | June 7, 2007 11:05 AM
I am at a loss trying to understand why Bush would push something like this. I can't figure it out. This is worse than when his father said "Read my lips" and then agreed to a tax increase.
He didn't know that his base would desert him on this? Perhaps it comes from living in Washington DC and coming to believe that the liberal Washington press corps represents public opinion.
Posted by: S. Sherman | June 7, 2007 11:28 AM
I just heard that Paris Hilton got out of jail and has started a group called "Paris Hilton and the Illegal Immigrants". They were working on their first cover tune titled "I Fought The Law" and quickly disbanded as they could not decide wheather or not the Law Won.
Posted by: fritobandito | June 7, 2007 11:51 AM
Hey, Frank, instead of you proclaiming what "conservatives" are allegedly "saying", how about actually talking to and interviewing these GOP critics of the Shamnesty bill?
Or maybe mentioning that only 26% of Americans support the bill?
Or maybe linking to Cong. Rohrabacher's actual remarks?
Posted by: Bruce | June 7, 2007 11:58 AM
I've said this before, the Republicans DO NOT CONTROL CONGRESS.
They cannot and did not bring this amnesty bill to the Senate floor.
Did a few Senators from both parties, someone/people from the Executive Branch, and other Agencies help construct this bill, YES
Special interest groups have been mentioned that also helped.
But get off the Corporate band wagon. It's always an easy target.
Where are the Union Bosses demonstrating, there not.
Where are the voices of America, not Washington and it's special interest groups.
Start checking the amendments, what they said, to strengthen this bill and see who voted for/against or them.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_110_1.htm
Posted by: PG | June 7, 2007 12:29 PM
Bush didn't expect he'd alienate his knuckledragging base -- that be yous, Sherman and Bruce -- because Bush has the mentality of spoiled child. He thinks everything he does will be perceived as right and cute and proper, for no more reason than it emanates from him.
That said, I certainly find it precious that the wingnuts used to praise this murderer because he was supposedly steadfast and principled notwithstanding the polls, but now they don't like him because he's taking an unpopular stand. You zombies are all cut from the same die, and as intriguing as a slice of Wonder Bread.
Posted by: a blinkin | June 7, 2007 12:51 PM
"Normally attuned to his base?"
Sorry, but the President hasn't been attuned to diddly-squat the past few years, what with the pork-crammed spending bills, immigration "reform," and other such crap the R's have tried to ram through.
Oh well, maybe we'll get another Reagan, after the R's have been voted out of power for the next 20 years.
Posted by: Brian | June 7, 2007 12:59 PM
This is worse than when his father said "Read my lips" and then agreed to a tax increase.
Posted by: S. Sherman | June 7, 2007 11:28 AM
Yeah the catalyst to the longest period of sustained growth in US history was a HUGE mistake. A colossal blunder.
Posted by: jethro | June 7, 2007 1:12 PM
Just another case where Bush proves that he is fact a "divider, not a uniter". If he's not pandering to his base, he's lost. No ability in terms of bringing people to a negotiated solution. Its more of the same, just a new, ironic, adversary.
Posted by: kb | June 7, 2007 2:37 PM
Just another case where Bush proves that he is fact a "divider, not a uniter". If he's not pandering to his base, he's lost. No ability in terms of bringing people to a negotiated solution. Its more of the same, just a new, ironic, adversary.
Posted by: kb | June 7, 2007 2:37 PM
Just another case where Bush proves that he is fact a "divider, not a uniter". If he's not pandering to his base, he's lost. No ability in terms of bringing people to a negotiated solution. Its more of the same, just a new, ironic, adversary.
Posted by: kb | June 7, 2007 2:37 PM
Amnesty by any other word is still amnesty.
Maybe instead of "doing what's right for America" , they should do what's right for the US Constitution. And that's secure the border. The US Constitution gives one role to the military (actually the Navy, but that was their perspective): secure the borders of this nation. Instead, Bush sent the military to Iraq to secure *their* borders.
Posted by: glen smith | June 7, 2007 5:34 PM
Stupidest
Person
Ever.
Maybe if chimpy actually READ the newspapers in DC, he'd have been influenced by the allegedly "liberal" media. But since he doesn't read....
Posted by: snitramc | June 7, 2007 5:45 PM
Maybe if the 2008 campaign had not started this year, there might have been a chance for reasonable men to craft a reasonable solution to the problem of twelve million or more illegal aliens. The lack of courage of our leaders and the huge minority opposed to a reasonable plan will push this off until 2009 or 2011.
Posted by: c. perry | June 7, 2007 7:03 PM
Where's the fence?
Posted by: Jimbo | June 7, 2007 9:45 PM
"Maybe if the 2008 campaign had not started this year,"
C Perry,
And that's the sad truth about our so called electoral system in America; it's always an election year, no matter what the year. Therefore, nothing of substance will ever be accomplished.
This year, 2007 is supposed to be a non-election year when things get done.
What a bad joke.
Posted by: C.Morris | June 7, 2007 10:51 PM
This is a big defeat for both the Sell Out Democrats
and Republican Panderers to
the Cheap Labor US Chamber
of Commerce and to the
Idiot in Chief George W Bush! We need to vote every
incumbent Democrat and
Republican who voted for
the Amnesty In Drag-socalled Comprehensive
Immgration Reform in 2008!
Posted by: Sandy | June 8, 2007 12:18 AM
He didn't know that his base would desert him on this? Perhaps it comes from living in Washington DC and coming to believe that the liberal Washington press corps represents public opinion.
Posted by: S. Sherman | June 7, 2007 11:28 AM
This is perfect.
A radical right president pisses off his radical right base, and who's fault is it? The Lib'ral media of course. LOL.
Can you say "kneejerk"?
This guy probably blames the liberal media when he burns his toast in the morning.
Posted by: david k | June 8, 2007 1:31 AM
That Bush threw rocks at his friends and then acts astounded when they are mad proves what an idiot he is. Any lost jobs coming from illegals is a drop in the bucket compared to globalization. Wake up America, your jobs have migrated to China, India and wherever the corporate "stab Americans in the back" greed mongers can hire workers at slave wages.
Posted by: skyreader7 | June 9, 2007 11:53 AM