Share This Article with a Friend!

No Thanks Jeb

Conservatives who might have thought that after Mitt Romney’s failed campaign the Republican establishment was going to throw in the towel and hand the next Republican presidential nomination to a small government constitutional conservative had better wake-up and recognize that the establishment is not going to let go of power without a fight.

Jeb BushExhibit A for this proposition is a small article in today’s National Review Online noting that former Florida Governor Jeb Bush (pictured) was in Washington, meeting with his “alumni group” -- including Romney’s pollster Neil Newhouse.

When asked by NRO what he was doing in Washington, Bush said, “I’m here to focus on educational reform, and that’s what I’m going to tell people.”

“…what I’m going to tell people,” and the truth are generally strangers in this context, so conservatives should assume that Jeb Bush is at least exploring the possibility of running for President.

A Jeb Bush run for the White House, accompanied by the kind of establishment Republican highhandedness that forced through the nomination of Mitt Romney, would be a disaster of the first order for the Republican Party and could very well be all the push libertarian-minded voters and small government constitutional conservatives need to take a permanent hike from the GOP.

Yes, social conservatives are inclined to think well of Jeb Bush because he signed the law to keep Terry Schiavo from being taken off life support. However, those who see in Jeb Bush a “more conservative” Bush should take off the blinders and look at his overall record as Governor of Florida, which reveals him to be the same kind of big government Republican that brought the Party to grief in 2006.

Bush’s “education reform,” like many of his other policies that sounded good in a speech, actually ended-up taking away power from parents and locally elected school boards and centralizing power in the hands of bureaucrats in the state capitol.

That’s not the kind of small government constitutional conservatism that elected thousands of Republican candidates in the Tea Party wave of 2010.

Jeb Bush also has an interesting penchant for revising Reaganism and Ronald Reagan’s record to comport with his own big government instincts -- particularly when it comes to matters of taxes and the growth of spending.

“Back to my dad’s time and Ronald Reagan’s time – they got a lot of stuff done with a lot of bipartisan support,” he said. Reagan “would be criticized for doing the things that he did.”

Bush cited, in particular, “the budget deal my dad did, with bipartisan support — at least for a while — that created the spending restraint of the ’90s,” a reference to a move widely viewed now as a political disaster for Bush and the Republican Party; breaking his pledge against tax increases and infuriating conservatives. It was, Jeb Bush said, “helpful in creating a climate of more sustained economic growth.”

Bush conveniently forgets that both his father and President Reagan got snookered in those “bipartisan” deals with Democrats because, while the tax increases are still with us, the spending cuts never materialized – a fact that President Reagan had both the grace and honesty to admit in his biography.

Jeb Bush, like Mitt Romney, may have some personal instincts of a conservative nature, but there’s nothing “small government” about Jeb Bush or his two terms as Governor of Florida. As Republicans weigh the prospects for 2016, they should choose from among the many fresh faces in the small government constitutional conservatives rising in the Party today and say “No Thanks" to Jeb Bush and the tired big government Republicanism of the past.

Share this

Heck No

If Jeb is anyhting half of what his dad, and the idiot was, heck no.  Don't even think about it.  I'll never vote for a Republican again, if he gets the nomination.  The thought is repulsive.  Why not nominate Bernie Sanders, the Socialist Senator from Vermont.  Same damn difference from where I'm standing.

While I agree...

... This criticism of Bush is quite amusing in light of Mr. Vigurie's support of Rick Santorum for the nomination in 2012.


Rand Paul....A REAL conservative for REAL conservatives

Libeeral Wusses

I am so sick of losing the presidency to really crummy people like Barack Obama and Bill Clinton because the Republican establishment ran vapid "moderate" (i.e. liberal) candidates who could not diffferentiate themselves from the Democrat and who failed to aggressively attack the Democrat's record that I have decided to back Jesse Ventura for 2016.  At least he would make the race colorful and aggressively pursue the Dem candidate.  A Ventura candidacy might even be fun.  Now if he could only be talked into running as a Republican ("ReBLOODlican") rather than an independant.

Jeb Bush and 2016

Jeb Bush has some residual support in Florida because his two terms as Governor were not challenging. After Dole, McCain, and Romney what are people thinking? Jeb is a "Moderate" who is for amnesty, big government, entitlements--dare I say it--a "RINO." No he may be a nice person, but America merits better!

Jeb Bush for President-NOT

Get out the Bushes!

No More Bushes

I for one will not vote for any member of the Bush family. First off, they are all moderates/liberals. Both 41 & 43 signed off on massive spending increases and, in 41's case, tax increases. That whole family supports amnesty for illegal aliens despite the basic failure of the 1986 amnesty. If the Republicans run Jeb Bush in 2016, then I will vote for the Libertarian, unless a credible 3rd party candidate shows up (or a new Tea Party forms), even if the Democrats run Hillary Clinton or someone equally objectionable. Jeb Bush would be no better than a Democrat, maybe even worse because Republicans would be even more inclined to roll over for his agenda than they are for Obama's.

no more Bushes

Bush41 Made a stupid mistake by believing the Democrats on taxes. Bush43 had a democratic sen.& Con. for the last 6 yrs. of his presidency that held funding for the war(')s. Now pray tell me what he should have done except what he did do, which was to protect the troops as best he could. I don't know enough about Jeb Bush to comment but read up on the history before you critizise that good family.

Viguerie Starting Early on Helping Democrats win in 2016

Viguerie your a fool! You Helped Hussein defeat Mitt Romney BY ATTACKING Romney day in and day out.Now your doing the same to Jeb Bush why don't you just register

as a Democrat you would make a Great Consultant for them!

Viquerie as a Demacrat

I agree He trashed them like they were garbage.

Viguerie Starting Early on Helping the Democrats Win

Elections are not about winning and losing but about advancing an agenda. What good does it do us to win with a guy who would be at home with the Democrats? Many of our problems stem from George W. Bush who governed in a fashion not much different than Bill Clinton. And he set the agenda, forcing Congress to defend him and his policies for eight years while the nation slid. There is no value in just winning - especially now when things are so dire. We cannot afford another eight years of holding on.

And that's assuming we can win with another RINO. The record isn't very good in that regard; we lost with Romney, McCain, Dole, Bush 41, Ford, etc., etc. The party keeps demanding unity behind a bland moderate, well, why won't THEY get behind a zealous conservative? They refused to give a dime of support to Todd Akin, for instance, prefering to lose that seat then be thwarted by a man who made an injudicious remark. Ditto Richard Murdoch; the Lugar people actively campaigned against him. Why should conservatives be the ones to  submit to their RINO "betters" here? Isn't it time to actually TRY a conservative candidate? Reagan was the only one they have allowed us since Goldwater, and that was over their objections. (that's why Reagan got stuck with Bush - for "balance")

If you want to lose again go right ahead and support Jeb Bush. Even if he wins WE lose.



conservatives will not bendover for Establishment R's again

Perhaps it is time for Big Government Republicans to understand that it was they, by focusing on destroying conservatives in the last national election, who reallly paved the way for an Oama victory and, in the long run lost the heart and soul of the Republican party.  Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory if you will!  The current leadership must finally open their eyes and remove their rose colored glasses so that they can fully understand this victory over conservatism is devoid of any good or real benefit to them or the GOP.  It is arrogance that convinces them to think that we don't recognize incompetence when we see it, especially here, in managing this poorly conceived and run election.  I hope that they don't think that they should continue to call the shots going forward with this abject failure in their resumes.  It seems that they are being somewhat dellusional in assuminng that!  Footnote: 68% of Republican voters in a recent survey taken after the election are either very or somewhat unhappy with this establishment leadership  cadre, so much so that a good many indicated that they are seriously considering forming or moving to a third party or, sans that just staying home for the next election.  Let's see how this leadership handles this emerging condition.

Another question that should be considered by Boehner and McConnell is exactly why anyone would want to vote for Democrat-lite (moderate R's) when you would end up with the same negative outcome or just voting for the real thing.  I think that I can safely say at this point, Establishment R's have sole ownership of this recent Romney fiasco and for that reason they have enabled us to slide further and more quickly into the socialist morass (or worse) and that the fecklessness, lack of will (and perhaps just a shortage of intelligence) by Boehner and McConnell and the rest of the beltway, establishment gang all but guarantees we will continue this ever increasing slide to oblivion.  In closing, this 'old' and entrenched ruling class represent the worst of what Friedrich Hyek warned of whereas big government, elected representatives and their partners in big business and big labor gleefully devide the spoills to the detriment of the hardworking, American people knowing full well that this unholy alliance could care less about the individual taxpayer.  As long as they can keep their jobs, their power and their perks (including their cadilac healthcare coverage, etc.) Washington will continue to be an overflowing sewer.  Perhaps what is needed is for a good flush.

The Inmates are RUNNING the Asylum!!

    There will NEVER be another White Male in the White House. The Freekin' Recipients  have taken Control of the System. Slavery Times are Back,  TheOnly Difference Is-- the Workers will not be taken care of, Provided for, by the Over-seers/Bossmen,As In the OLD DAYS, The workers will provide for themselves, and the Bosses, Primarily "People of Color," And Hard Core Feminist Women, Elected by their Own,--will TAKE what they WANT , at the Point of the I.R.S. GUN! The System has come Full Circle, Courtesy of the Un-Qualified Usurper/Dictator, The "KENYAN KOMMIE KLOWN", and His Democrat/Socialist/PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL Party! After a few more years of Obama's Reign, Jeb Bush will look like aHard Core Conservative!


Perhaps the American recollection will not have expunged the memory of the 10 trillion deficit, the near collapse of the economy, two unnecessary criminal military expediditions that brother George brouht upon the country. How many Bushes can this county stand? After the first, G.Herbert, and the huge loan scandals and Desert Storm, it was still standing; after the second, George of Crawfold, it was teetering on the brink... can one - anyone! - take a chance on yet another of that greedy bunch?

Jeb and All the Bushes

JAATB, I agree with your litany of complaints against George W. Bush save one; we can disagree on Iraq, but Afghanistan? Come on! Bush would handed the entire government over to the Democrats had he NOT gone into Afghanistan. That was not a war of choice in any fashion. There was absolutely no way he could have ignored Bin-Laden at that point. In case you have forgotten, the country was enraged and demanded action. What was Bush going to do? Make a strongly worded protest?

I'm hearing that more and more from conservatives, and it is pure sophistry. There was absolutely no choice; calling it criminal is like calling a police shooting of a suspect who fires on them criminal.

Beside that you are right; Bush was a catastrophe from any reasonable standpoint. He broke the back of the conservative movement.