Gap widening between Bush and conservatives

Townhall.com ^ | January 23, 2004 | Jonah Goldberg

[Apple Pan Dowdy]

Gap widening between Bush and conservatives

Jonah Goldberg

I thought President Bush's State of the Union address was fine. It wasn't outrageously long. He drew a bright line between himself and his critics on the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act, Social Security Reform, etc. He delivered it well, and the nudity was tasteful and integral to the plot.

As luck - or bad timing - would have it, I was invited to Manhattan to address the New York State Conservative Party right before the president addressed the nation. It seemed only fitting since the subject of my speech was the conflict between Bush's "compassionate conservatism" and traditional conservatism. You see, conservatives in New York City have suffered more and for longer than conservatives in the rest of America. Trust me, I grew up on New York City's Upper West Side. We felt like Christians in Ancient Rome.

Well, after three years with George W. Bush at the helm, many conservatives are starting to feel like we've been sent to the catacombs. Don't get me wrong. Out in real America where most Americans - liberal and conservative - don't focus on politics every day, Bush is still doing very well. And, even among conservatives, Bush has considerable political support. But among ideological and intellectual conservatives, emotional support for Bush is starting to ebb.

I can't point to anything scientific. But if you pay attention to what conservatives are saying at meetings and in magazines, on the Web and at the think tanks, as well as what readers, friends, colleagues and sources say, there's a definite undercurrent of discontent with the president.

For some it started with his plan to offer amnesty-lite to illegal immigrants. For others, it's his fence-sitting on gay marriage. For others, like me, it was his signing of the campaign finance reform bill even though he thought it was unconstitutional. Or maybe it was his support for steel tariffs. Or the farm bill. I forget.

Anyway that doesn't matter. What unites pretty much all of these grumblers is a deep sense of, well, disgust with how much this administration is spending.

When it comes to taxpayer dollars, this is the second most "generous" administration in American history, second only to that of another Texan, Lyndon Johnson. There may be good aspects to George Bush's "compassionate conservatism," though on the whole I never liked it, but it's clear that compassion doesn't come cheap at the Bush White House, on whose watch overall spending from 2001 to 2003 grew at 16 percent and discretionary spending went up 27 percent. That's double Bill Clinton's rate.

Bush's defenders are eager to point to the war on terrorism as an excuse for increased spending. Fine. But that's only a small part of the story.

Under Bush, spending on education has gone up 60.8 percent, on labor 56 percent and on the Department of the Interior by 23.4 percent . The price tag for the president's Medicare plan alone starts, but won't end, at $400 billion. The farm bill was a pork horror show, pure and simple. More people work for the federal government now than at any time since the end of the Cold War.

Brian Riedl of the Heritage Foundation sums it up this way: "Overall for 2003, the federal government spent $20,300 per household, taxed $16,780 per household, and ran a budget deficit of $3,520 per household."

The reason most Americans haven't heard a lot about all this is twofold. Conservatives have stayed relatively quiet and liberals have controlled the anti-Bush microphone.

Democratic presidential candidates and interest groups have been screeching that the president is gutting education and abandoning the elderly. Obviously this is nonsense on tall stilts, since Bush is spending a lot more on both than Bill Clinton ever did.

In fact, on Medicare and education, for example, the Dems think Bush is being stingy. And a study by the National Taxpayers Union found that each and every one of the Democrats running for president have plans that would raise the deficit even more, from $169.6 billion under Joe Lieberman to - get this - $1.33 trillion under Al Sharpton.

Conservative opposition to such overspending is more complex than the media and the left think. Some just don't like red ink. Others think big government erodes freedom and traditional arrangements. Others believe it slowly inoculates the citizenry to greater levels of social engineering.

Whatever the reasons, conservatives - as opposed to partisan Republicans - have sincere misgivings about the kind of presidency Bush is conducting. A lot of compassionate conservatism is smart politics for the Republican Party, and some of it is even good policy. And, yes, conservatives understand that the GOP is practically the only place they have a real impact in electoral politics.

But I'm not sure George Bush understands how much he is asking from those who brought him to the dance.

[Apple Pan Dowdy]

It will be interesting to see here whether we can discuss this very real and threatening issue without "bashing" the President we all love so much. We seem to keep sweeping all this under the table, fearing that to discuss it will hurt Bush's chances for re-election (which we do not want to do). But just how long can we go on pretending to ignore it? If we speak up, will the President hear and respond.... I think he will.

[Lazamataz]

Gap widening between Bush and conservatives

Ain't that the truth.

Expect him to strenuously push for, and sign, a much more restrictive Assault Weapons Ban.

This ain't your daddy's Reagan.

[Agnes Heep]

If we speak up, will the President hear and respond.... I think he will.

Bush being what he is, I don't think so. One of his chief virtues is that he has his own set of beliefs to which he remains faithful to the bitter end--kind of like the Andy Reid of politics. If the beliefs are sound, all is well. Otherwise ...

[William McKinley]

Funny, if he were going to do that, I would have expected him to say he was going to do that. Everything else which has been disappointing he pretty much just did what he said he was going to do.

[Lazamataz]

Funny, if he were going to do that, I would have expected him to say he was going to do that.

He said it.

[section9]

I disagree Laz. Why should Bush alienate his base by signing the AWB. That thing is buried and will stay buried by Tom DeLay. Bush does not want it on his desk. Bush made a promise to sign a renewal if it reached his desk. If it sunsets, too effin' bad.

As to Jonah's article, I agree with much of what he says, but I believe that Bush has begun to respond after setting the table for centrist voters with the Ed Bill and the Granny Bill. Domestic spending is set to grow by 1% this year in the 2005 budget.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[William McKinley]

Please find a quotation from him where he said he was going to "strenuously push" for a "much more restrictive" assault weapon ban.

[TLBSHOW]

I wish we had discussed it a year ago. But sometimes wishing doesn't work! In the end truth will win!

[carton253]

Could you provide some proof that the President is going to strenuously push for and sign a much more restrictive Assault Weapon's band.

Thank you!

[Lazamataz]

Could you provide some proof that the President is going to strenuously push for and sign a much more restrictive Assault Weapon's band.

You are asking for proof of a future event.

If I could do that, do you think I'd be wasting time with you morons?!??! I'd be cashing my Lotto checks!

Nice try, though.

[biblewonk]

Not all conservatives are fiscal conservatives. The statement about marriage is more important than any ideal about small government held by some conservatives.

[Lazamataz]

TLBSHOW AMNESTY!!!!

Wow, maybe Bush is right. Amnesty for our forgotten. :o)

[mr.pink]

You see, conservatives in New York City have suffered more and for longer than conservatives in the rest of America. Trust me, I grew up on New York City's Upper West Side.

Poor Jonah...always painting himself a victim right out of the gate.

Please Jonah...tell us how you have suffered.

[William McKinley]

You said he said that's what he was going to do.

[carton253]

You are asking for proof of a future event.

Why shouldn't I ask you for proof since you are posting as if it is an already done deal. I'm just asking you how you've come to that decision.

[Pietro]

"In fact, on Medicare and education, for example, the Dems think Bush is being stingy"

Its important to keep this in mind as we debate.

I am certainly disappointed in several of W's decisions, however, politics will not support a straight-jacked idealouge. And of course, the alternative is major-bad-worse-to the nth f'in' degree.

I'm all for this debate w/i the conservative movement, its what distinguishes us from the libs (that we can debate intellegently) but we must never loose sight of the fact that the demonicrats cannot be allowed to return to power.

[Lazamataz]

I disagree Laz. Why should Bush alienate his base by signing the AWB?

Why should he alienate his base by gutting the First Amendment with CFR? Why should he alienate his base by declaring "Open Border Season"? Why should he alienate his base by signing massive new prescription drug benefits? Why should he alienate his base by proposing Universal Hillary Care?

The answer: Cuz he doesn't care. He doesn't have to. He is counting on the calculus that for every conservative he loses, he'll gain two squishy moderates.

I don't blame him, but I can't vote for it.

[Lazamataz]

Why shouldn't I ask you for proof since you are posting as if it is an already done deal. I'm just asking you how you've come to that decision.

Informed speculation.

[Lazamataz]

You said he said that's what he was going to do.

You said I said he said that?

[The Mayor]

Good article and I agree. I support Bush on most things, I do not like the excessive spending at all.

But just like I said to my wife the other night, he gives in to the demonrats, signs an education bill with teddy kennedy, and in no time he is being accused of not spending enough.

The dems will never be happy no matter what, give them nothing and we get attacked, give them what they want and it's not enough, and still get attacked.

I say givem nothing..