Loading ...“Why do Republicans Hate America?”
Yet Another Guest Column — This One By “BAD DOG”
In my last column, I caused an uproar because I pointed out that Republicans, who frequently self-righteously point to themselves as “pro life” and advocates of a “culture of life,” enjoy sanctioning torture, even though it offers little military value. My theory, supported by research, is that they do this because the right wing personality type is highly excitable and susceptible to fear.
The responses from across the aisle gamely tried to refute the idea that there is a contradiction at all, but failed. One commenter’s longwinded refutation was a colorful litany of misdirection. If conservative radio personality Mancow says waterboarding is torture—a point made for illustration, not as evidence, as supposed—then I must accept everything Mancow says for the rest of his life as fact. He said waterboarding, a torture technique as old as the Spanish Inquisition, is not torture, but just because Cheney says it isn’t, and just because some White House lawyer hacked out a memo saying it isn’t, don’t make it so.
The fact is, beyond the obvious truth that it’s torture, waterboarding—which can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, lung and brain damage, physical injuries such as broken bones, lasting psychological damage and death—is considered torture by a significant majority of Americans (A CNN Poll).
He said “countless American lives” were “undoubtedly saved” by torture but there is no evidence for this; in fact, there is ample evidence that torture produces no military value (Think Progress), which is why the Republican nominee for President in 2008 was against torture (NYT), at least until he was for it (CBSNews). The commenter next said the vast majority of detainees who were tortured were guilty of what the crimes of which they were accused, but while this may help him sleep at night with blood on his hands, the exact opposite is true (Guardian–UK). He similarly said the vast majority of death row inmates are guilty, but a study found that 7% are in fact innocent (Source: The death penalty: a worldwide perspective By Roger G. Hood), meaning Bush may have murdered nine innocent people while Governor of Texas.
He took offense that the phrase “culture of life” was attributed to conservatives, because he personally didn’t use it, even though Bush and other Republican officials used it frequently to justify their social legislation over the past eight years (Washington Post). He also took offense that I used the term “pro life” to mean pro-life, not just pro-fetus, which is so bizarre I’ll let it speak for itself. He next attacked my sources without bothering to read them, sometimes confusing websites with sources, and concluded by stating, out of the blue, that I somehow believe Republicans want to repeal the First Amendment.
I think it’s safe to say my thesis about conservative hypocrisy remains unchallenged.
Now it’s time to take aim at another Republican myth, which is that Republicans love their country more than Democrats and that Democrats are traitors. We will focus on three legs of this myth. First, that Bush was a great President uniquely suited to defend the nation for his time, and that any criticism of his radical right wing agenda directly translated to material assistance to al Qaeda—treason. Second, that Republicans are big supporters of the military. Third, that Bush always put the interests of the nation first, even when his decisions were politically unpopular, which is why Bush will later be acknowledged for his brilliance—when we’re all dead.
This week, let’s tackle the first of these three legs of this strange myth.
Three days after September 11, Bush stood on the rubble of the World Trade Center with rescue workers (CNN) and said, “I can hear you! I can hear you, the rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.”
It was an inspiring moment, particularly for me, as my wife worked on the 87th Floor of the North Tower, five floors under where the first plane struck. She barely escaped with her life. I watched the building burn from the roof of our apartment building, thinking she was dead for hours.
Unfortunately, Bush didn’t catch the guy who did it, saying six months later, “I don’t know where Bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” (50BushFlipFlops.Com) Of course it wasn’t. As we all know, Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11, was.
Let’s just say my inspiration and hopes turned to disappointment.
Republicans made Bush the hero of the hour. One right winger with more money than brains even made a propaganda film (MetroActive.Com) about 9/11 portraying Bush as strong, decisive and in command. But that movie was nothing compared to the actual propaganda coming from the right wing media, the White House and Bush himself.
Let’s dissect these lies one by one with the facts, and see if Bush was indeed the hero of the hour and fit to continue leading the country, instead of an incompetent asleep at the wheel during one of the nation’s greatest disasters.
After 9/11, in a town hall meeting in Orlando on December 4, 2001, Bush said, “One of the first acts I did was to put our military on alert.”
But Bush didn’t do this (Wall Street Journal). Shortly after the plane hit the Pentagon, Air Force Richard Myers raced from Capitol Hill to the Pentagon’s command center, filling with smoke, and ordered Major General W. Montague Winfield, the officer in charge, to raise the military’s alert status to Def Con III, the highest state of readiness since the 1973 Arab-Israeli war.
At the town hall, Bush was asked, “What was the first thing that went through your head when you heard that a plane crashed into the first building?”
Bush answered, “Well, I was sitting in a schoolhouse in Florida … and my Chief of Staff—well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane, or—anyway, I’m sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, ‘America is under attack’ … Anyway, it was an interesting day.”
He later told the same story to another audience (YouTube video). But Bush couldn’t have seen either plane hit the Towers. First, videotape of the first crash didn’t become available until after 9/11. Second, Bush was in his limo on the way to the schoolhouse (Washington Times) when the first plane hit. He also confuses hearing about the first plane and the second plane, as Andrew Card told him about the second plane and delivered that quote about the nation being under attack.
This lie is strangest of all, because it makes Bush probably the only man in America who doesn’t remember what he was doing the morning of September 11.
On the night of 9/11, Bush addressed the nation (AmericanRhetoric.Com) and said, “Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government’s emergency response plans.” But he gave no such order (WSJ). The government implemented them itself (FBI), thanks to an executive order by President Clinton, who actually cared about terrorism response (FAS.Org). This was the Interagency Domestic Terrorism Concept of Operations Plan, or CONPLAN (FBI), created by a Presidential Decision Directive in 1995. FBI spokesman Paul Bresson would later say (WSJ) CONPLAN was activated without any White House input nor any order from the President.
After 9/11, Bush said he ordered all planes to ground, but he did not. The FAA did (History Commons).
After 9/11, White House officials said the President got out of his chair upon hearing of the second attack (the famous Bush/Andrew Card photo) within seconds (Refer to previously-referenced WSJ Report), but videotape shows he stayed seated, doing nothing, for over seven minutes (YouTube video). Many people I talk to excuse this because they believe this was Bush hearing of the first attack, but it’s the second. In fact, according to Card, he said to Bush, “A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack.” (Speigel) So what does the Commander in Chief do?
Bush would later say (Boston Herald), “This teacher was going on about the curriculum, and I was thinking about what it meant for America to be under attack. It was an amazing thought. But I made up my mind that if America was under attack, we’d get them. I wasn’t interested in lawyers, I wasn’t interested in a bunch of debate. I was interested in finding out who did it and bringing them to justice. I also knew that they would try to hide, and anybody who provided haven, help, food, would be held accountable by the United States of America.”
He thought all that during those seven minutes, while he sat on his ass.
After 9/11, Bush apologists later said the reason he stayed in his chair after hearing of the second attack was so he wouldn’t alarm the children in the classroom with him or otherwise do something that would look bad. In Fighting Back, Fox News VP of News Bill Sammon wrote: “Bush wondered whether he should excuse himself and retreat to the holding room, where he might be able to find out what the hell was going on. But what kind of message would that send—the President abruptly getting up and walking out on a bunch of inner-city second-graders at their moment in the national limelight?” And yet the President stayed in the school until 9:34, later remarking what a great backdrop the kids made to his speech.
In fact, since his whereabouts were well publicized, and it was thought he might be a target, basically the President endangered the lives of hundreds of children and teachers as well because he refused to move his location.
Probably the only decision Bush made on 9/11 was to agree to Cheney’s request to shoot down the last plane headed for Washington, DC, saying in his own recollection (Washington Post), “You bet. We had a little discussion, but not much.” Apparently, Bush made such a decision to shoot down an airliner carrying U.S. citizens quite easily. It was the right decision, but one would expect at least some sober reflection from a guy who called for a “culture of life” –Source: USAToday (but maybe not from a guy who loved life so much he set a record by executing more than 150 people as Governor of Texas). But later it would be questionable whether he even made that decision (LA Times).
One might think the White House didn’t trust Bush too much with making decisions.
After 9/11, Bush said he wanted a 9/11 Commission, cooperated fully with it, and wanted to meet with them. Um, no. He resisted the commission, didn’t cooperate, and refused to meet with them on the record, and only with Cheney present. Meanwhile, right wing clowns like Rush Limbaugh regularly attacked families of 9/11 victims when they barked too loudly to get a straight answer out of the government. Ann Coulter would write in one of her works of trash (Cup Of Joe Powell Blog): “These broads [9/11 widows] are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much.”
“9/11 widows are happy their husbands died in a horrific tragedy cuz now they get to insult Bush!!!!!”
Bush never held anybody accountable for 9/11, least of all himself. And we are supposed to give him credit for being no major attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11, but nonsensically supposed to blame Clinton for there being a major attack on U.S. soil on 9/11.
Bush would later remark about 9/11: “Anyway, it was an interesting day.”
Well, at least he got one thing right.
I think we have debunked the myth that Bush was the hero of the hour on 9/11, and was fit to continue leading the country as its commander in chief, much less politicize 9/11 to ram a radical right wing agenda down the country’s throat free of criticism.
Later, of course, we invaded the wrong country and started torturing people.
My question is: Why do Republicans hate America so much that they voted in 2004 to continue incompetent leadership that failed us on 9/11 and every day since then? — This Column Was Contributed By “Bad Dog”
Agree? Disagree? Have Something To Add? Please Show Your Appreciation To “Bad Dog” For Taking The Time To Author This Guest Column In The Comments Section Below
***
I certainly won’t bother refuting your claims, as I agree that Bush was probably one of worst presidents when it comes to foreign policy, though I had to chuckle at the notion that Clinton cared about responding to terrorism. While he did sign off on the programs you describe he also passed on at least three offers to help take Bin Laden into custody. I certainly don’t believe for one second that he believed Bin Laden was the psycho he turned out to be, his own state department called him “the greatest single financier of terrorist projects in the world” and that there was clear and convincing evidence of this. IMO, this seemed to be grounds for taking some sort of action.
This, by no means, excuses the actions and inactions of Bush over his 8 years in office. FWIW, I don’t think either of them did a great job in terms of foreign policy, though Bush’s foray into Iraq is certainly worst than any of Clinton’s screw ups (Somalia).
Your comments regarding my response to your last column are lies.
This is ironic as you went through a complete meltdown whining that I was lying, while it was in fact you who were lying all along.
President Bush served his two terms and is no longer President. Get over him. Let’s hear about all the great things the dems have done lately…
I’m still waiting…
What’s wrong, cat got your tongue?
PS. I will be sending a copy of this column to the Illuminati and the Free Masons.
@Fandb, Heh… FandB — Always consider it an honor when you are taken to task in a high-visibility column. And oh, hey — how do you KNOW Bad Dog was even talking about YOU in the first place, bro?
Talk about a narcissist!
@The GTL™, It’s pretty clear if you look at the “response” to his last column.
@Fandb, I *personally* think you are flattered, bro
@The GTL™, Guns, it is good of you to give to give Bad Dog free run of your site. He is almost the archetype of the dem/lib/lefty that has driven me away from the Dems. Pretty much follows the San Francisco Burton Machine Botique Liberal That has produced the likes of Pelosi, DiFi, and Boxer. Intolerant, hate filled, elitist, and bigoted. Thank you for showcasing this denied side of the left.
@Joe Lovell, Joe, you are my hero…For weeks now I struggled with the rationale as to why the great GTL would “give free run” of his site to the likes of whomever the “Bad Dog” is…and boy is he bad. Bad columnist, bad commentor, bad debator, bad judgement, bad ideas, just bad in general. What a brillaint perspective Joe. Yes, you nailed it, his entire act reminds me WHY I am a conservative, why Dems “Hate America” and plot to turn the U.S. into a “slow France”. I have pretty much tuned out the GTL since the rabid Dog took over. My only concern now, is has the GTL himself been infected…?
@CLD, Heh… I still need somebody (nudge, nudge) for the right/conservative weekly perspective. I like the idea of having a Saturday column from one perspective and a Sunday column from another. Any takers?
@The GTL™, Obama! Birth Certificate! Czar! Pelosi! Socailist! Boxer! El;itist!.
there you go, Guns. Just run that every Sunday.
@Joe Lovell,
LMFAO BRO!!!
@Joe Lovell, Or you could simply keep saying it every day, as you’ve been doing.
@CLD, I agree with the hero part, Joe nailed it!
@CLD, Every now and then a business develops such a good, effective business model that they become wildly successful and cultivate throngs of imitators. It sounds like GTL might be playing off the wildly successful Fox News model by making his site more “Fair and Balanced”.
@Fandb, Well, quite frankly, over some cold brews at Sallys place last Winter, that was the plan I suggested to the GTL…an online Hannity/Colmbs type blog. I just didnt think it would be some guy as Joe observed, would be an angry, irrational far left yahoo…I thought I would be debating the GTL himself…a much more rational, libertarian open to other ideas and views. The DOG has no tolerance for any side but his own alien ideology. As Joe said, the Pelosi, Boxer bizzaro world…sad…
@CLD, But he provides a demonstration of how the far left can actually behave. He possesses opinions that are bound to drive people to the center . . . or the right.
@Fandb, ***WINK***
@Fandb, Maybe so, but it gets really old reading the same dribble every time, “Repubs are evil, liberal are Gods, all conservative ideas suck, Bush is the blame for everything, Candian health care is great, blah, blah, blah…oh yea, and anyone who disagrees with me is a whining little girl”…Thats not much fun to read, debate, or contemplate. There is zero to discuss with that thinking. The GTL listens, the Dog hears only his voice. I certainly dont agree with much liberal doctine, but at least I can have an intelligent discussion with some, like the GTL and others on this site. The Dog consistently passes gas and clears out the room, at least for me…he stinks!
@CLD,
There are certain canines that would say this is just right wing whining over getting a dose of their own medicine. ;-
@CLD,
Check my sources? How about this — look above your response to my posting at your own comments:
“Bad columnist, bad commentor, bad debator, bad judgement, bad ideas, just bad in general. What a brillaint perspective Joe. Yes, you nailed it, his entire act reminds me WHY I am a conservative, why Dems “Hate America” and plot to turn the U.S. into a “slow France”.”
Now, please tell me how I’m wrong in assuming that your claim that Dems hate America and are plotting to turn the US into a slow France are not an example of venom and vitriol.
To copy FandB — I’m still waiting…
Oh, by the way, claiming that Bad Dog started it is what I hear from my 5th graders. Do you really want to use that excuse?…
@Joe Lovell, “Intolerant, hate filled, elitist, and bigoted” — talk about the pot calling the kettle black! First off, a little intolerance is okay if you are insisting on intelligent, fact-based discussions and not name-calling. I don’t see any intolerance in Bad Dog except for foolishness. Argue a point with real facts and I’d bet he’d tolerate that discussion. Second, “hate-filled” is also how I’d describe generalized comments about liberals, kind of like the ones you and CLD are making. Third, “elitist” — I keep hearing this about liberals and I really don’t get it — yes, I’m educated, but my concern is for the vast majority of Americans, not the wealthy and privileged at the top — how is that possibly elitist? Really, can you explain that without resorting to insults? And last, “bigoted” — where the hell do you get “bigoted” out of what Bad Dog and other liberals say?!? I guess I am an “elitist” if I ask people not to use meaningless, harmful buzzwords and instead to use real words with real meanings…
Now I get it, you’re not just crazy scared of the Illuminati, you’re also a Truther! Now things are becoming more clear…
Now THIS is funny, and I don’t care who you are!
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/618fb6cbf2/gus-porter-american-legend-with-thomas-haden-church
@Joe Lovell, LMFAO, Joe!!! What the heck ELSE should I be doin’? LOL@@@@@!!!!
@Joe Lovell, Very good find Joe Lovell. There are also a few other good videos on there.
Yawn.
@GawdDayumAmerica,
“The America of our dreams, where every child is welcomed . . . in life and protected in law, may still be some ways away,” Bush said. “But even from the far side of the river . . . we can see its glimmerings.”
Oh wait….no…I can see it coming into focus….no those are not newborns………….wait…….yep thats the Rio Grande and those is future Democrats I see coming into view.
There is one inaccuracy with this article. “And we are supposed to give him credit for being no major attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11,” Does anyone remember Anthrax? That was an attack by terrorists on this soil.
Bad Dog, thanks for your commentary! What I particularly like about your writing is that you are using facts to back up your opinions — whether or not someone disagrees with your opinions is their choice, but at least they should have the honesty to say so. Instead, I see some people attacking you for being “extreme”, but I don’t see any facts being used to support their opinions. In fact, I see a lot of comments that use some pretty nasty, snide, snarky remarks, which is ironically what they’re accusing you (and all other liberals, with a nice broad brush) of doing. Pretty hypocritical in my view.
Anyway, I’m glad you’re addressing the “Republicans love American and Democrats are traitors” myth. I’m a liberal Democrat, no holds barred there. I’ve also voted in every election I could since I was 18, I was a Boy Scout, a Freemason, an enlisted infantryman in the 101st Airborne, a cav scout in the PA National Guard and now I’m a middle school special education teacher. HOW THE HELL AM I A TRAITOR?!????? I’ve given a large part of my life to service to my country and now it’s my freakin’ job, and just because I vote Democrat and think government should help people makes me a damned traitor? Since when is voting one’s conscience traitorous? Oh, that’s right, it would be if you’re a British Colonial Governor trying to repress freedoms… I’ve received emails authored by Coulterites and Rushies that accuse me of being unpatriotic and unAmerican if I vote Dem, if I support Obama, if I want healthcare reform, etc. It’s ridiculous and I should ignore them for the petty, stupid comments that they are, but it really hits a nerve because I’ve given to my country, I’ve offered my life as a sacrifice for our freedoms and now these oxygen-thieves are spitting on me. Screw them and keep it up, Bad Dog — we need the facts and the dialogue to keep flowing so “traitors” like us can keep working towards making America even better.
@LiberalPatriot, You should check out some past posts before you start making “broad stroke statements”…”Nasty and snide comments” are the trade mark of Mr. Dog…do your research and back up your claims with “evidence” as you seem to think he has done. I have nothing against liberals, just the ones that have something against conservatives. We all have to exist, but you cant exist to eliminate the other side, evidence or not….
@LiberalPatriot, OK “LiberalPatriot” . . . errrrr . . . Bad Dog . . . errrrr Liberal Patriot, whatever name you’re going by today. Rather than just attacking the past administration, as most liberals tend to do, all I’m asking for is to hear from you guys . . . or you guy . . . about all the great things O’bummer and his cronies are doing to . . . errrr . . . for . . . the American people. Let’s hear it dem’s, let’s hear about all the good stuff that’s going on now that democrats have been in control for nearly a year. You only have about one more to go before you lose your majorities in congress.
Also, to clarify, I don’t recall hearing anyone on this site call any other commenter a “traitor”. And from the actual comments, not the comments that some liberal commenters imagine they’ve heard, but the comments actually made, none of the conservative or republican oriented commenters seem to believe that any of the other commenters are traitors. I know Bad Dog . . . errrr . . . “Liberal Patriot” . . . errrrr Bad Dog often makes references to all those “traitor” comments, but I’ve been around here for quite a while (always under the same name) and like I said, I’ve never seen any commenter refer to another commenter as a traitor, regardless of their positions on any issues.
Also, regardless of whether you or anyone else thinks a commenter does or doesn’t “support” his/her argument with links, you’ll find on this site that the discussions are generally very civil and productive. The venom and vitriol you may have witnessed recently started and ended with the presence of one specific commenter who could not make a counter-argument with resorting too personal attacks and insults. It very quickly became very tiresome and boring. Short of that, I think you’ll find very interesting discussions here if you stick around.
@Fandb, Sorry to disappoint, FandB, but that’s not me. Who do you think I am, GawdDayumAmerica? There ARE other liberals who visit this site, yo. I’ll be responding in my next column, otherwise won’t be here. But think what you like. I agree with Liberal Patriot’s comments, so if you want to think that’s me, rock on. There IS one thing you’re absolutely right about. Things WERE much more civil before I showed up and interrupted the right wing circle jerk that passed for discussion on this site. Ya got me there.
@bad dog, You can think whatever you want Bad Dog, but the fact is the discussions here always have been more productive than in the left-wing echo chambers like Kos, etc. All they do is bash anyone who doesn’t agree with them. At the very least, the discussions here are productive in that they explore the merits of good ideas rather than just bashing people. So call it a right wing circle jerk if that makes you feel better about yourself, it’s your loss.
@Fandb, To start, FandB… er, — screw it, I don’t have the stomach to deal with the cutesy crap. I’m not BadDog and I’m surprised that you have the gall to make that assumption.
You want to hear about what’s going on right now? Fine — here is a taste:
1. We’re cleaning up the freakin’ mess that the Bush administration and their minions left our country in. We have an illegal war that we need to withdraw from as well as a legitimate military action that was neglected for freakin’ 7 years that we now have to get back on track so we can withdraw from that as well. Not that big of an issue, right?…
2. We’re dealing with the fallout from having an extended rape-and-pillage spree by corporate America that finally hit a wall, hence the bailout. You can blame Clinton a little for opening the door to deregulation, but Bush and his cronies kicked it WIDE open and lots of very ethical companies like Enron, Halliburton and all their good friends drove their tanks right through. Now we get to deal with it. Again, not a big issue, right?…
3. We are left with a toothless tiger for environmental regulations to keep our air, water and land clean and non-hazardous to human life. That one I put right on the doorstep of the Bush White House — they did everything possible to weaken government protections without taking the drastic (and politically sensitive) step of trying to legislate pollution. Again, no big deal, right?…
Just a few examples — there are plenty more.
Keep in mind, when Obama was elected, he had a lot to deal with — it’s kind of like parents coming home from a long vacation to find that their idiot kid and his friends had a series of massive, destructive keggers since the minute their taxi picked them up to take them to the airport. Holes in the walls, cigarette burns on what’s left of the furniture, empty cans everywhere, vomit and semen stains on all the curtains and bedsheets, and — amazingly — Mom and Dad’s bank account, which looked healthy before they went away, is now HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS IN THE RED BECAUSE OF YEARS OF DEFICIT SPENDING TO FUND AN ILLEGAL WAR!!!
Okay, Obama’s had a tough time getting things going because Dems don’t legislate in lockstep like the DeLay Republicans did, but he’s got to spend a lot of time cleaning house, which is why liberals are still a little pissed at Bush and his neo-con ilk. Does that make sense?
Meanwhile, terrorist tactics like bringing AR15s to healthcare town meetings aren’t helping have a real discussion over what is potentially one of the biggest topics we have ever needed to deal with, which is changing the way this country addresses healthcare — incidentally, something that Obama is and has been working on.
How’s that?…
Now, about the traitor thing. You’re right, I haven’t actually seen any commentators on GTL claim that liberals are traitors. My apologies if you felt that I was painting with too broad a brush.
What gets me riled up is when I hear comments from people like Limbaugh and Coulter (especially Coulter!!!) making these claims — it’s pure, unadulterated bile and is personally offensive to those of us who have served our country with pride and choose a different point of view on government’s role in our lives. Make no mistake, this is a pervasive view — Coulter wrote a bestselling book about it!
@LiberalPatriot, My bad LiberalPatriot. Your first post sounded a lot like BD’s writing style but this one didn’t, by far.
Your post still didn’t say what good the dem’s are doing. It’s just more Bush bashing.
Bush spent eight years cleaning up the disasters left by the Clinton administration, especially after he neutered our foreign intelligence operations, empowered Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups through inaction, raided Soc Sec to “balance” the budget, derailed us from Reagan’s track of prosperity and put us on the road to fiscal disaster, not to mention bringing blatant immorality to the White House, then lying about it under oath.
Your teenager party analysis would more appropriately be applied to the situation Bush walked into as opposed to the situation Obama walked into.
As much as the liberal talking heads like to claim that “Rush Limbaugh is the head of the republican party”, etc., the fact is most republicans/conservatives don’t take marching orders from Rush, Ann Coulter, or anyone else for that matter. As far as I’m concerned personally, Rush is a little too far right and too extreme for me, and Ann Coulter is just trying to sell books. They both make good points from time to time, but often take things too far.
Most conservatives believe in a core set of conservative values that are founded in the United States Constitution, and they make their decisions and judgements based on these values.
So when we see the President, or anyone else for that matter, moving this country in a direction that is contrary to those values, we will speak out and fight against them.
When we see the government moving away from the traditional values and practices held by the people of this country as we grew our country to the greatness we enjoy today, we will speak out and fight against it.