Let Bush Be Bush: "Mr. Bush is Mr. Reagan's Heir"

American Enterprise Institute ^ | 12/17/03 | Michael A. Ledeen

[gramho12]

If you look at President Reagan's first years, there are several bills he signed that would not meet the conservative standard. He was a pragmatist when he had to be - it is just that we tend to forget the first years. We did not have the total news coverage and political "junkery" back then as we do now. Doa search, take a look at some of the legislative actions taken during his first year and you may by surprised.

[San Jacinto]

Super work listing those accomplishments, Southack!

And Bush has gone on record just this week stating that he would support a Constitutional Amendment in defense of marriage.

Also, he sticks to the task where judicial appointments are concerned. He will not back down, and he will ultimately prevail. This is a vey important issue.

[Southack]

"You know just because you post these actions in bold, larger font, and different colors on every thread that dares question the President doesn't make any of the actions listed anything more than big government and a waste of taxpayer dollars."

Banning Partial Birth Abortion was a big government "waste of taxpayer dollars" to you?!

Killing the U.S. - CCCP ABM nuclear defense prohibitions were a waste of taxpayer monies to you?!

Killing the Kyoto Global Warming treaty was a waste of funds to you?!

Arming pilots was a waste of tax money to you?!

Rolling back CO2 red tape regulations was a waste of taxes to you?!

Easing the rules for Genetically Modified food is a waste, to you?!

Building logging roads as firebreaks, without having to fill out bureaucratic "Environmental Impact Statements" is a waste of taxes to you?!

Do we even live on the same planet?!

[Cicero]

I cannot imagine Ronaldus Maximus, prior to the onset of Alzheimer's, signing the CFR or the Medicare bills.

Reagan held the line on spending for his first few months in office, and then he pretty much gave up. In the end, he signed spending bills that increased the deficit by about a trillion and a half.

I don't fault him for it. He did what he could. And I believe Bush is doing what he can. There's no point in ideological purity if you can't win an election or get it through congress.

As another response above has indicated, Bush has done plenty. He is far more conservative than his father. He has been sound on all the basic issues except spending, and I think if he had pushed harder on that he probably wouldn't have achieved anything else at all, because congress would have revolted.

[CWOJackson]

Great points.

[Southack]

President Bush also ordered Attorney-General Ashcroft to formally notify the Supreme Court that the OFFICIAL U.S. government position on the 2nd Amendment is that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, NOT a leftist-imagined *collective* right.

In contrast, Reagan held the official government position to be a collective right in line with President Carter before him.

Reagan was great, but nowhere near as radical Right as Bush.

[ohioWfan]

I would be highly suspicious of someone who signed up December 7, 2003, and who called you a 'Bushbot' in his first post to you.

Most likely a retread who has been banned, and is assuming a new identity.

And, Veracruz......don't take the name of my Savior, and Lord in vain..........please.

[gramho12]

Item 3: Rating Judicial Nominees From Newsmax: You will recall back when the Democrats were in charge of the executive and legislative branches of government, they had the American Bar Association involved in the selection of judicial nominees. Many of us had insisted that the ABA should have no special role in picking judges, and indeed, President Bush 43 removed the ABA from this position, something that his father and Ronald Reagan had declined to do.

From a Bruce Bartlett article: Reagan may have resisted calls for tax increases, but he ultimately supported them. In 1982 alone, he signed into law not one but two major tax increases. The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act raised taxes by $37.5 billion per year, and the Highway Revenue Act of 1982 raised the gasoline tax by another $3.3 billion.

According to a recent Treasury Department study, TEFRA alone raised taxes by almost 1 percent of the gross domestic product, making it the largest peacetime tax increase in American history. An increase of similar magnitude today would raise more than $100 billion per year.

In 1983, Reagan signed legislation raising the Social Security tax rate. This is a tax increase that lives with us still, since it initiated automatic increases in the taxable wage base. As a consequence, those with moderately high earnings see their payroll taxes rise every single year.

The following year, Reagan signed another big tax increase in the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984. This raised taxes by $18 billion per year or 0.4 percent of GDP. A similar sized tax increase today would be about $44 billion.

The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 raised taxes yet again. Even the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which was designed to be revenue-neutral, contained a net tax increase in its first two years. And the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 raised taxes still more.

The year 1988 appears to be the only year of the Reagan presidency, other than the first, in which taxes were not raised legislatively. Of course, previous tax increases remained in effect. According to a table in the 1990 budget, the net effect of all these tax increases was to raise taxes by $164 billion in 1992, or 2.6 percent of GDP. This is equivalent to almost $300 billion in today's economy.

Reagan was a great President, and a great man, but he was not totally Mr. Conservative.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

-- Banned Partial Birth Abortion

-- Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty

-- Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court

-- Signed 2 income tax cuts ---- 1 of which was the largest Dollar value tax cut in world history

-- Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains

-- In process of eliminating IRS marriage penalty.

Here on the planet Earth -- as opposed to the Bizarro-World -- these are all commonly accepted as bedrock, essential conservative principles; and their passage and enactment, conservative victories.

... and: they all happened on GWB's watch... and nobody else's.

Period. End of sentence. End of paragraph. Full stop.

Ronald Reagan knew there was a great deal more to "conservatism" than simply the size of the government's purse.

Right smart fellah, that Reagan. :)

[q_an_a]

now that is a good post. good for you and thanks for a list that I'll bookmark and pass along to others. high five, jolly good and more!!

[Southack]

"I'm having difficulty with you saying that Bush is a better President than Reagan. It's absurd and shows that you've been drinking far too much Kool-Aid."

What I said was that Bush was more conservative than Reagan in several ways, not better (at least not quite yet).

See Post #31, for instance.

Likewise, President Reagan didn't ban Partial Birth Abortion. Bush did.

President Reagan didn't kill the U.S. - CCCP ABM Treaty. Bush did.

President Reagan was great. Bush will be better."

And what is shows, contrary to your claims above, is not that I've had too much Kool Aid, but rather that I'm willing to compare facts rather than legends and myths.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

(Joined the Constitution Party on 12/9/03 and it feels soooo goooood.)

Ah. Not a conservative, then.

That explains it.

[Texas Federalist]

"Reagan was great, but nowhere near as radical Right as Bush."

You're on crack.

[Southack]

Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty
Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court
"No, the Senate did when it refused to ratify either treaty--before Bush even became President."

You are rather gullible and naive, aren't you!

President Clinton enacted the Kyoto Treaty through his Executive Orders, requiring all government agencies to behave *as if* it had been ratified by our Senate, even though it hadn't.

President Bush killed Kyoto by reversing those Executive Orders of Clinton.

Not that some 3rd Party neophyte from the absurdly named "Constitution" Party would know or even be capable of mentally comprehending such realpolitiks, though.