Jeb Bush bastardizes conservatism to justify his agenda
George H.W. Bush promoted "kinder and gentler conservatism," which implied that conservatism is neither kind nor gentle. Mitt Romney said he was "severely" conservative, as if liberty and free markets can be "severe." Now it is Jeb Bush's turn to philosophically vandalize conservatism with his "Conservative Immigration Reform Agenda."
Donald Trump has introduced the idea of an immigration system which comes down to the mass deportation of 11 million people at a cost of as much as $600 billion, massive new federal powers to step on the civil liberties of ordinary Americans, and a border plan that could be best described as a fantasy.
That plan is not something a small-government conservative would put forward. It requires the federal government to manage the exorbitantly expensive mass deportation of millions of people. It also requires a massive public works project unlike anything we’ve seen since the construction of the Hoover Dam – and the federal government, as you may have noticed, hasn’t been capable of running such a project judiciously of late.
Bush provides no evidence of where his $600 billion figure comes from. In actuality, once illegals are cut off from housing, schools, medical care, and jobs, many will self-deport. He has no problem supporting the $700-billion TARP bailout for big banks, but not a small fraction of that for a border fence.
Bush also shows a total lack of understanding of what a small-government conservative is. A small-government conservative spends on only the essentials – national defense and security being the primary focus. Not hundreds of billions to bail out banks. It is precisely the security of the nation that a conservative would focus the government on. Bush seems to think that spending money to build a wall is liberal, while spending hundreds of billions for corporate welfare is conservative.
A great nation must secure its borders for national security and public health reasons. We don’t have to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on fencing when we can use new technology
This is what liberals say who don't want to secure the border – that they will have video cameras and drones that will watch the illegals streaming across, and that will substitute for a border fence.
We must find a practical solution to the status of the 11 million people here illegally today. We need a vigorous path to earned legal status where people are required to learn English, pay a fine and taxes, pass a criminal background check, work and not receive federal government benefits.
And what if they don't do any of these things? Will Bush push to deport them then? Certainly not. In any event, conservatives believe in the rule of law, and these people are here illegally. Rewarding their illegality is not conservative; it's flagrant disgard for the law.
As a deeply committed conservative who has spent my adult life fighting to strengthen the Republican Party and to advance the causes of limited government and individual freedom, I am confident we will choose the path that best meets those missions.
It's offensive to hear Jeb Bush call himself, and by extension his amnesty policies, "conservative." Legalizing illegal aliens has nothing to do with limited government and individual freedom. We lose our individual freedoms when illegals rape and kill our citizens, when they take our tax dollars for "social" services, and when Spanish becomes the primary language in our kindergartens. Limited government is about attending to the security of the nation, but Jeb Bush twists it like a punch line in a joke.
His redefining of conservatism is just like what the liberals do when they redefine a man as a woman or a nuclear proliferation deal as an arms control treaty. If he's nominated, he will further dispirit voters who want a clear contrast, and we will lose again, just like with Romney and McCain.
This article was produced by NewsMachete.com, the conservative news site.