Nor surprisingly, our County Executive has had to back off the ridiculous claims he made last week that he wouldn’t seek out any federal stimulus money. As I’ve written over the past week, even many conservatives who would normally share his ideology urged him to reconsider his stance for the well being of Milwaukee County.
But Walker and his supporters in the media, especially on the AM radio dial, now want to have it both ways. They still want to claim he’s “standing on principles” by not seeking out any of the federal stimulus money, while at the same time claiming he never said he would do so.
It’s a tactic right out of the classic right-wing playbook. Simply repeat as factually correct your own version of events regardless of what you actually did or said.
I think it’s important to put the facts out there about this issue of what our County Executive said and when he said it to counter the clear attempt of some of his supporters to soften Walker’s initial radical stance on this.
So I’ll simply let Scott Walker speak for himself.
This all started last Tuesday, January 6th when County Exec. Walker said the following in this article in the Journal Sentinel (LINK):
…Walker said Tuesday the county and the country are better off without the spending. The only federal economic stimuli Walker endorses are tax cuts.
“All we are asking for is ‘do no harm,’?” the county executive said. “I’m not asking for any new projects or things to be done here.”
Milwaukee County has some huge funding dilemmas, including $300 million in backlogged repairs for parks, annual shortfalls of up to $43 million in transit and some $300 million needed to rebuild its mental health complex.
“The last thing you want to do is put money in hands of government,” if the goal is to pull the economy from recession, Walker said.
Clearly, in the own words of Scott Walker, he did not and would not seek any of the federal stimulus money.
The next day, Wednesday January 7th, the Journal Sentinel carried another piece and quoted Scott Walker again (LINK):
Walker said Wednesday that he won’t ask for anything from the federal economic recovery plan. He cited his opposition to deficit spending as a strategy to jolt the economy from recession and said he philosophically favors tax cuts as a remedy.
“There’s never any free money from the federal government,” Walker said. “There’s always strings attached.”
Again, pretty clear. Milwaukee County Executive is not going to ask for any federal stimulus money. On the Wednesday edition of the Jay Weber show on WISN 1130 AM, Walker went on to say:
“The reality is, if you really want to stimulate the economy, you don’t put money in the hands of the government, you put it in the hands of the people.”
But then as opposition grows to his stance, Scott Walker begins to change his tune a bit. From the Friday, January 9th edition of the Journal Sentinel (LINK):
Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker is opening the door a bit wider to acceptance of federal stimulus aid, after he was criticized for saying he would refuse to seek such funds.
Walker said he still preferred tax cuts to deficit spending on infrastructure projects as a way to revive the U.S. economy.
And Walker said he still has reservations about taking federal aid, especially if it means spending more county money as part of a local match.
But he said he wasn’t rejecting outright an offer of stimulus cash.
“I’m not opposed forever” to carrying out projects with federal money, he said Friday. “If they put money in programs where we have legitimate needs, of course we are going to look at that.”
He listed three conditions for acceptance of the federal aid: that it not require any unusual local match; that it not go for a service that would require county taxpayers to pick up the bill in the future; and that it not have hidden operating expenses.
It’s pretty clear in this article that he isn’t as opposed to the federal money as he was only a few days earlier.
So to recap: On Tuesday it was “NO NO I’m not going to ask, this stimulus package is wrong”.
Wednesday brought, “Government is bad and I won’t accept anything other than tax cuts”.
Then on Friday you have, “I prefer tax cuts to this stimulus, but I wouldn’t outright reject federal stimulus money as long as it meets three conditions I just came up with”.
Someone explain to me how that isn’t a complete 180 degree turn by our County Executive on this issue?
And to be clear, changing your mind is fine. I’m glad he is changing his tune on this and it isn’t at all what I have a problem with.
What I’m pointing out here is those, like my pal Jay Weber on WISN 1130 this morning, who are trying to change how this whole thing went down by claiming Walker was never against the stimulus money for Milwaukee County to begin with are wrong. Walker’s stance has been anything but consistent here.
As you can see by the County Executive’s own words above, that’s just not the case.
He wasn’t “clarifying his position”. He was just changing it as it became clear his initial stance of “NO!” wasn’t as popular as he had initially calculated.
A small point in the larger scheme of things, but it’s important to point out the facts about this issue and hold people accountable for their decisions.. Ironically, that’s usually something the right laments is lacking in our political environment today.
I live in the Washington Heights neighborhood of Milwaukee, WI with my wife Jen, our daughter Emerson, and sons Carter and Colton.
Come on now Dan, this isn’t just out of the playbook of the right, this is pure and simple POLITICS. Flip-flopping and wishy washy behavior is and always will be in both the right and left wing playbooks. I’m not a fan of it, and I’m disappointed that Walker did not stick to his guns, or at least clarify his position from the outset (which is what he should have done politically).
I’d comment about the “stimulus” package, but I just don’t have the energy today!
Dont worry Dan, you are going to get your make work,keynesian economics pig trough sandwich. Then when this bubble bursts and your kids have a third world country left to them you can tell them it was all George Bushs fault.
Two assumptions you’re making that I find interesting. That the bubble hasn’t burst and that somehow GWB isn’t responsible for anything that’s going on right now.
Like this deficeit is just a new thing that will just show up and be an issue next Wednesday
Funny how these same republican “principles” have no objections to spending an amount equivalent to the stimulus package *EACH YEAR* in order to prop up our global military empire, yet loudly proclaim that a similar one-time investment in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is somehow morally wrong.
This nonsense about “conservative fiscal responsibility” that the Syked-Out Crowd continues to peddle is getting to the point of sheer absurdity.
Dan,
1)Why this ongoing obsession with Scott Walker? Could it be that you, and other local Dem activists, are trying to short circuit his coming run for the governorship?
Recall anyone?
2)Bush is responsible for the current deficit. Obama will be responsible for the coming, larger, deficit. “Conservative fiscal responsibility” was a bitter joke, liberal “investment in the UNITED STATES”
will be a bitter farce.
Smitty: Holding public officials accountable is considered being obsessive now? Sorry, but that’s a bit hard to swallow.
He doesn’t need Democratic activists or me to short circuit his coming run for governor, he’s doing a good enough job of that without us thanks to moves like this.
The reality for all Milwaukee County residents after this latest boneheaded publicity stunt by Scott Walker should be a frank analysis of the facts;
1) Scott Walker is not from nor did he grow up in Milwaukee County.
2) His constant grandstanding and attempts to destroy County Government is purely for the sake of making a name for himself. He is not providing any leadership for the County.
3) He has continually blamed the pension scandal for eight years now without doing anything to improve County Government.
4) He does not possess a college degree.
5) He is the main obstacle between coming to a compromise over the 91.5 million transportation Federal money for Milwaukee that has been frozen for years and is continually worth less over time and could possibly taken away from Milwaukee.
6) The Walker administration has spent over 10 million dollars of your tax dollars on the Ceridian payroll system which is fraught with so many operational errors that it will probably never work properly and will ultimately be the source of endless litigation.
The list can go on and on but at some point we should remember the old saying ‘ignorance is bliss’. Because if those residents of Milwaukee County believe that we are living in blissful times, I would suggest it is high time we become non-ignorant!
“Funny how these same republican “principles” have no objections to spending an amount equivalent to the stimulus package *EACH YEAR* in order to prop up our global military empire, yet loudly proclaim that a similar one-time investment in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is somehow morally wrong.”
David V., where do we start with this. Funny how youve bought in to the Obama language of calling this an “investment”, as if we will be getting some sort of positive return. “the one weve been waiting for” Your majesty Obama has called for yearly trillion dollar monopoly money “investments” for many more years to come. By the way, Bush and many of the RINOs in office are not fiscal consevatives, that is not an indictment on being fiscally conservative.
bonyT: BS. Plain and simple. Our fiscal woes can be traced back the the Reagan years, when Ronnie blew up the national debt, then handed to Bush I, who blew it up more. Only Clinton (you know, the tax and spend liberal) balanced the budget and began paying DOWN the national debt. King George the Daft was handed a $160 BILLION SURPLUS and quickly turned it into into a red-ink nightmare. These are facts. Get over it.
Do your homework, then tell me – how many trucking millionaires were created by the public investment in the interstate highway system? Tell me how much upward mobility did we create by investing in the GI Bill? Tell me how many private firms profited using the technology and knowledge gained through public investment in the space program?
The bottom line is tax dollars, wisely invested, create a positive return on investment by making our citizens more productive, more mobile and more educated. Three things that republicans apparently don’t want for America.
Now if you run along, you have another 30 minutes for Charlie to tell you how to think.
David V, if you think that 1) the stimulus package is “one time..” you are grossly underestimating the political power of the newly popular “stimulus” ideology, 2) if you think this is an “investment” in the US, there needs to be a different definition in all of the dictionaries. Just because you spend money doesn’t automatically define it as an investment (ESPECIALLY if it’s spent by the government). Investments are meant to create wealth, not create “jobs” and infrastructure that will later be maintained, repaired and supported by increased taxes; or worse yet, higher inflation. 3) Spending money on the MILITARY (not the demagogue statement “global military EMPIRE”) IS an investment in the United States. It’s called protection. Know what would happen to our economy if there was a massive attack on our soil killing thousands in a matter of hours?? Oh, that’s right we experienced that 7 years ago, and things didn’t go so well, economically…..
Dan, holding public officials accountable is important, it’s just that many of your posts, and the posts of the people you link on this blog, don’t comment on the public comings and goings of Gov Doyle and his pay for play schemes, so if the retort to Smitty is strictly “holding public officials accountable”, than do that for everyone, not just the reviled Scott Walker.
I’m just curious, but what stimulus packages are available for Milwaukee County?
Sean, you recite republican talking points well. Fortunately, the majority of us have seen enough hard evidence to realize that they’re nothing but a load of hooey.
Hearing snarky, condescending lectures from a republican on fiscal policy sounds a lot like the 0-16 Detroit Lions giving football advice to Steelers right now.
David V, I love how you are obsessed with Charlie Sykes, does thinking of him keep you awake at night. Have you ever written a comment without mentioning him. Are you in denial David, they do have help for that sort of thing. The United States has created more wealth, more technology, fed more people, given more charity, created a bigger middle class, defended more people against tyranny,than any country in history and David attributes it all to unions and “tax money, wisely spent” Now put down your Shepherd Express and go back to slopping out of your government pig trough job.
bonyT: You’re right, the US HAS done all that, and it is clearly been done under the stewardship of progressive leadership like FDR, JFK and Clinton.
Conservatism has failed America. That’s the undeniable truth. Whine all you want, bonyT, but CONSERVATISM HAS CLEARLY FAILED AMERICA. The simple fact that you have nothing to offer except decades-old political cliches and insults is mute evidence of that.
But by all means, keep posting. It’s fun to read the inane ramblings of the grossly misinformed.
“Mute evidence”?
Do you mean Moot?
So, what are the stimuli available for Milw. County?
Vocabulary is your friend.
Mute: adj.
3. Expressed without speech; unspoken: a mute appeal.
Ahh, both work well in that context.
Our country was founded on conservativism. Seperation of powers, limiting the power of a central government (ie.states rights and checks & balances). Making government beholden to laws that protect individual rights and freedoms. Private property rights, freedom of speech, freedom from oppressive government taxation. You know, the things you call cliches. All of our founders would be labeled as extreme right wingers by you. Maybe they listened to Charlie Sykes.
I’m sorry, I don’t see a flip-flop.
I see a man who demonstrated he had conservative principles and uses them as a “general” philosophy or guideline for managing the government.
However, this doesn’t mean that one ought to be willfully blind to alternative options. Walker is against accepting federal monies as a general rule, but will consider his options if it’s best for the community.
Wrong again bonyT. Our founders were liberals in the true sense. They would ABHOR your party’s attack on civil liberties. They would shudder in disgust over your party’s tying religion into the public debate. They would recoil in horror over your party’s “Free Speech Zones”, media censorship and warrant-less wiretaps. Our founders would be horrified by Bush’s blatant disregard for the law by his use of signing statements.
Don’t kid yourself. America is a liberal nation, founded on liberal ideals. You’d know this is you spent your time listening to something other than right-wing propaganda 24×7.
Once more for the record:
***********************************
* CONSERVATISM HAS FAILED AMERICA *
***********************************
Um . . . our founders were “Classical Liberals” which is pretty much the same thing as today’s conservative.
Do your homework and you will find that Classical Liberals and today’s Welfare Liberals are not the same thing.
Classical Liberals believed in a small government – in particular because at the time governments usually found a way to stomp on our freedoms. It wasn’t until the Great Depression that liberalism began to morph and began to trust a growing government.
Conservatives didn’t change on this issue, the liberals did.
David V.
America is a liberal nation, founded on liberal ideals.
What Aaron Rodriguez said is correct. Our founders were NOT liberals in your sense of the word. In the last two hundred years the word has done a 180 degree turn. Conservatism may have failed America but your liberalism will bankrupt it.
The founders would abhor your party’s politcal correctness and speech codes. They would be aghast at your party’s support of the fairness doctrine and affirmative action. They would shudder in disgust your party’s rampant corruption.
Sorry Smitty and Rodriguez, you’re both wrong. Modern conservatism is to classical liberalism as the Detroit Lions are to good football.
-Huge government
-Huge debt
-Restricted civil liberties
-Policies aimed exclusively to benefit the top .1%
-Rampant corruption and cronyism
-Military adventurism
The closest ideology to modern conservatism is the fascism practiced by Italy and Germany in the 30′s.
You con-jobs talk a good game but the facts speak otherwise. You wanted your political hegemony in 2001 and you got it. For 6 years, you had a monopoly on power, and now we’re reaping the fruits of your failed ideology. There is absolutely no doubt that the sorry state of our nation is due to the failed policies of the republican party. To argue otherwise is simply folly.
***********************************
* CONSERVATISM HAS FAILED AMERICA *
***********************************
Some comments.
Scott Walker has shown extreme inflexibility. The man stand in front in a 48 star flag on the County web site for gosh sakes.
Liberalism … that of the classic sort … came out of the Enlightenment. Like pragmatic government, enlightenment philosophy prided itself of rational thinking, i.e. the use of social scientific principals to establish a rational model of the world and to base government on that model.
The modern neo-conservative movement has a few rational people, but then it has a large following of people who ignore science (like global warming) and rational thought (like the supply and demand for oil affecting the price.)
The left also has its share of kooks, but most American leftists kooks (God love’em) are like cats, they are hard to herd. Perhaps this is because so many are free thinkers.
Ideological extremism, leads to irrational and irresponsible government.
Walker is an ideological extremist. Just like ideological extremist on the left, such as Lenin or Mao, he chooses to ignore reality in favor of his internal world view.
I think Scott and Charlie et al. get most of their taking points from reason.org. Supervisor Rice is bringing in one of the Reason Institute transportation (cough, choke) “researchers” Thomas Rubin to spread disinformation about KRM. Friday, January 16, 2009 – 10:00-11:00 – Milwaukee County Courthouse, 901 N. 9th Street – Room 203P
One more thing:
Smitty said: “Conservatism may have failed America but your liberalism will bankrupt it.”
Really Smitty, is the sky blue in your world?!? Do you have ANY idea what party is responsible for 95% of our nation’s debt? Hint: It’s NOT the Democratic Party.
It is simply astounding to me to read republican claims of fiscal responsibility, small government and civil liberties when your proven track record is exactly the opposite.
A guy I respect quite a bit once said, “Ye shall know them by their fruits”. Lets just say that your talking points and your fruits aren’t exactly in agreement right now.
***********************************
* CONSERVATISM HAS FAILED AMERICA *
***********************************
DavidV,
I don’t think you know what conservatism is. Conservatism it technically a branch of European Liberalism.
In America, there were only two kinds of liberals – Classical and Welfare. Our founders like John Adams and Alexander Hamilton were classical liberals/conservatives because of their fondness for a constitutional monarchy and for a free market.
The free market philosophy is what separated the Classical Liberals from today’s conservatives. Classical liberals shared a suspicion for commerce, whereas the conservatives welcomed it during the industrial revolution.
Welfare liberalism in an invention of the late 1800′s which called for more government action in order to promote individual liberty and equality of opportunity. Conservatives believed this was primarily an obligation of the citizenry, and therefore turned their back on more government interventionism.
So no, today’s liberalism would astonish our founding fathers. For the most part, they viewed government suspiciously and certainly didn’t want to expand it to the size of their European counterparts.
Classical liberals refused to grow the government to institute fresh and new ideas, and therefore they were called traditionalists or conservatives.
The core of conservatism is based upon the knowledge that government is meant to protect us from harm and provide law and order for the citizenry. Therefore, you will find that conservatives will only promote the expansion of government when it involves the promotion of military defense or internal law and order.
The idea that conservatism can be compared to fascism is one of the most ridiculous ideas I’ve heard in a while. Fascism is only possible with a big government, which is the aim of liberalism, not conservatism.
David V., when you reference your founders, are you refering to Yosif Stalin & Karl Marx. Talk about a history revisionist, have you actually ever read any of the quotes from the founders of the constitution.
“shutter in disgust over tying religion in to the public debate”, — ok you really don’t know your history.
“your parties Free Speech Zones”— Huh?
“media cencorship”— Huh?
“his use of signing statements”—-Huh?
“warrantless-wiretaps”—the ones okd by the justice dept
Ok, now I’m starting to get in to your psyche, you think George Bush was behind the 911 attacks, right?
bonyT, your infantile ramblings have pretty much sealed your fate on this forum. Marx? Stalin? Clever. It doesn’t take a leap of faith to surmise that you’re little more than a mindless follower who can only parrot back platitudes from others.
Later. At least your colleagues can put together an argument that holds water for a fraction of a second.
David V, funny how you liberals always say your for the middle class, yet if only the middle class voted, youd never hold office. You always claim to represent small business, yet once again, if you actually let only let them vote, sorry you know the answer to that. You do have the felon, illegal immigrant, and welfare recipient vote wrapped up though, ill give you that.
Aaron, you do a good job of piecing together talking points from the GOP playbook. Unfortunately, your talking points have very little in common with the proven track record of your party today.
Again, if you cons want to live in a bubble and deny the reality that is right before your eyes, be my guest. Hey, it’s a (nearly) free country. Knock yourselves out.
But for the love of God Almighty, please stop acting surprised when the majority of Americans rise up and shake their collective heads in disbelief over your insistence that this turd you’ve been polishing is something other than a stinking piece of excrement.
Good day.
Another classic, bonyT.
I’m fairly certain that you probably have no idea why America rejected your party and ideology, yet the answer is to be found in your very own inane, semi-literate ramblings.
I’m sure this irony is lost on you.
David V.,
The Republicans are indeed responsible for much of our current national debt. But can you believe that the coming spending spree will balance the budger or reduce the debt? It’s a recipe for out of control pork, inflation and continued recession (if not worse).
If modern conservatism is the heir of 30s fascism then modern liberalism is the heir of Soviet Russia and Mao’s China. See, I can make a statement as absurd and stupid as yours.
By the way, speaking of rampant corruption and cronyism,
have you been reading the news lately? See all those “D”s after the names of the corrupt and the cronies? Or are you stuck reading Media Matters and Kos?
David V,
“Aaron, you do a good job of piecing together talking points from the GOP playbook. Unfortunately, your talking points have very little in common with the proven track record of your party today.”
I don’t know what you’re talking about. You need to take a breath and chill out a bit. The information about liberalism and conservatism I cited is not from some mythical GOP playbook, but rather from a political science textbook I had in my college years.
If you doubt this, it’s called “Political Ideology and the Democratic Ideal” by Terence Ball and Richard Dagger. The information can be found in chapter 3 [liberalism] and chapter 4 [conservatism].
The book is an excellent read and a real eye opener. I assure you, since my college professor was liberal, this textbook is not some GOP playbook.
Now please, instead of labeling everyone who disagrees with you some crazy right-wing wack-job, why don’t you dialogue with us?
David V, I am not a water carrier for the Bush republican party. Maybe your not aware, but he and is ilk have fallen out of favor with the conservative members of the party. I believe his “compassionate conservative”message is flawed in both name and the way he carried it out. Conservatives don’t believe in deficit spending, free but fair trade,judges who rule on the law as it was intended, economic freedom & free enterprise. Not socializing risk like the Freddie Fannie bank bailout debacle.They don’t look to government to solve all problems. Wether you care to recognize it or not, and it doesnt matter to me who you blame it on, our entitlement obligations are unfunded in a number of years and yearly trillion dollar make work deficits are only going to speed up the process.
Quote: “Now please, instead of labeling everyone who disagrees with you some crazy right-wing wack-job, why don’t you dialogue with us?”
Why are you lying Aaron? I never said anything of the sort to you or Smitty. Your side kick bonyT chooses to post idiocy, and I labeled it as such.
What seems to be the case here Aaron, is that you – like many of your conservative brethren, simply cannot accept that anybody else might have a valid opinion or idea in this society. Perhaps that comes from the steady drumbeat of right-wing propaganda that permeates our airwaves 24×7 that labels everyone who disagrees as “left-wing wack-jobs” and refuses to dialog with them? (You seem like a bright guy, so I’m assuming that the last bit of irony was not lost on you)
From a previous post, for someone who proclaims their superior knowledge of political ideology, you are strangely obtuse about fascism and its recent parallels to neo-conservatism.
Consider:
-Strong, militant nationalism
-Scapegoating of “enemies” (liberals, gays, Muslims…)
-Disproportionate amount of public funds given to the military (Currently, the U.S. outspends the entire world COMBINED on military expenditures)
-Disdain for human rights, intellectualism, labor (Gitmo, Abu Grahib…)
-Corporate power encouraged and enhanced. (Corporatism anyone?)
These are all characteristics of fascist regimes, including those of Mussolini, Franco, Hitler and Pinochet. One cannot deny that the Bush/Cheney administration had many of these same characteristics. Add to that our attack on a sovereign country that posed no threat to us, and these parallels become even more frightening.
Now of course, you’re probably right in pointing out that neo-conservatism isn’t the same as the conservatism that you’re talking about. But as the great philosopher Frank Zappa once said, “You are what you is”.
Perhaps when your party decides that it wants to stop pandering to corporate power, the super wealthy and the extreme right, I’ll consider joining your party again. That’s right – I’m a former Republican, having voted for both Dole and Bush. But little by little, it became abundantly clear that I was voting against my own interests by voting Republican. The last 8 years have cemented that fact home.
I give up, you win.
You give up? Why? Because I didn’t acquiesce to your opinions?
Seriously – you asked for dialog, yet you REFUSE to do the same.
Why is that?
You’re wrong bonyT, because the last poll I saw showed GWB with a 75% approval rating among Republicans and a 72% approval rating among self identified “Conservative Republicans”. (link). Those numbers are contrary to your incorrect attempt to defend conservatives against the legacy of the past eight years.
Apparently, the “dialog” Aaron is interested in is more accurately defined as “monologue”.
Dan, let me clarify, amongst fiscal conservatives, he is not popular. Increasing entitlement spending, creating new medicare entitlements, and doing nothing about earmarks have not been popular. He has been popular with social conservatives. He has been excellant with regard to defending the country against terrorists,tax cuts, and he has left a terrific legacy on the Supreme court.
“He has been excellant with regard to defending the country against terrorists”
I imaging that the 3000 or so New Yorkers who died under his watch on September 11 might disagree….
While I appreciate what you’re saying, I think it’s pretty much your opinion, and an incorrect one at that.
I just talked via IM to a “fiscal conservative” and he is still a Bush supporter. So are people like Paul Ryan, Scott Walker and Grover Norquist. And I have to think that fiscal conservatives had no problem with Bush or abandoning their “principles” when it came to tax breaks (through deficit spending) for the wealthiest Americans, a group they usually fall in to.
As a “fiscal conservative” I don’t see how you can say he’s been excellent at “tax cuts” when they’ve largely been financed on deficit spending, which I thought was something “fiscal conservatives” disapproved of? Nor do I see how you can on one hand say he’s not popular with you, but done a whiz bang job with the economy, terrorism, and his legacy on the SCOTUS.
Sorry, but the fact that you’re defending him puts you in that 30% of American’s who also think he’s done (and is still doing) a good job. The rest of us, 70% of Americans, disagree with you.
You can talk about approval ratings all you want, by that standard, he is more popular than your Democraticly controlled congress, which has a lower approval rating. You would use the same class warfare argument whether the highes tax rate was 90 percent or whether it was 20 percent. It is the same rhetoric you have heard throughout history. The economy is not a static pie, where if you allow 1 group to keep more of what is theirs, it is at the expense of another. Lowering taxes on capital creates more capital and creates more jobs, it is merely a fact. If you think redistribution of wealth and “trillion dollar deficit for years to come” is a good thing, than youve got your man. If you think energy costs are too low and making energy more scarce and more expensive will save us all from doom and gloom than youve got your man.
I used approval ratings to point out that you were wrong in your assertion that Bush had “fallen out of favor with the conservative members of the party”, not so you could change the subject.