Posted on 10/11/2005 9:30:01 PM PDT by churchillbuff
WHEN Bill Clinton left office, many Americans felt relief. The era of personal scandal and endless campaigning was over. The adults were back in charge. Five years after his election, only Republican apparatchiks now praise George W. Bush. He is more partisan, less competent and far less mature than his predecessor. Compared with the BushII administration, the 1990s epitomise good government.
It quickly became clear that Bush was not a fiscal conservative. He combined support for tax relief with a willingness to subsidise the usual Republican camp followers, especially farmers and businessmen. He pushed through the largest expansion of the US welfare state. And he became the first full-term president in more than 150 years to veto not one bill.
Fearing fading popularity as a result of his bungled response to Hurricane Katrina, the President proposed spending "whatever it takes" to rebuild the city of New Orleans, piling debt upon debt. Corruption and self-dealing are emerging barely a month later. At the same time, he centralised political control in Washington. Rather than return educational decisions to the states, he strengthened national regulation of local schools. Instead of relying more on private social services, Bush pressed to subsidise religious charities, extending federal power even further.
After offering a measured response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, Bush plunged the US into an unnecessary war in Iraq, dragging along allies such as Australia and Britain. The administration manipulated questionable intelligence to justify the invasion, sacrificed friendly international relationships in an attempt to win UN approval, failed to anticipate inevitable Iraqi opposition to US occupation and ignored the unpleasant impact of reality at every turn.
With two or three Americans dying every day, the administration spins the same rhetoric of freedom marching ever forward. The President looks like the Wizard of Oz, who tells Dorothy and co to ignore the man behind the curtain. He presents life as he wants it to be rather than as it is.
While making decisions of enormous importance every day, Bush treats government as an inconsequential social club. Administration appointments go to people based on personal connections rather than philosophical principles or practical competence. It's hardly surprising to dump a political crony into a public affairs job at an obscure agency. But to turn the Federal Emergency Management Agency over to someone whose primary experience is running horse shows is risible.
Moreover, to nominate his personal lawyer, who apparently has not thought about constitutional jurisprudence since law school, to the nation's highest court demonstrates shocking irresponsibility. There are tens of thousands of equally competent corporate attorneys in the US, all of whom would be equally good choices for the US Supreme Court.
Harriet Miers's only qualification is her personal connection to Bush, a connection likely to prejudice her judgment in important cases arising from administration actions.
Perhaps more than any other decision, Bush's choice of Miers demonstrates his essential lack of seriousness. For the conservative movement during the past quarter-century, there has been no more important goal than to shift the Supreme Court towards a more responsible course, interpreting the constitution as written rather than as left-wing interest groups wish it had been written.
So important to conservatives has been this objective that many have responded to criticism of the President's fiscal and war policies by emphasising their concern for the high court. Bush was better than Democratic presidential contender John Kerry on this issue, they said. At least in this way, they thought, Bush would move the US in a more conservative direction.
The President's malign influence extends to Congress. He has emphasised results rather than principle. To pass the Medicare drug benefit, the house Republican leadership held the vote open for an unprecedented three hours, allowing Majority Leader Tom DeLay and others to twist the arms of recalcitrant legislators.
This dedication to winning at all costs encouraged the kind of abusive tactics employed by DeLay, informally known as "the hammer". Whether or not his indictment on conspiracy and money-laundering charges in Texas is politically motivated, he has made retention of political power his highest goal. DeLay mirrors Bush in denying that government spending can be cut and defending the most irresponsible pork barrel projects.
Clinton was a disappointment, a man of enormous promise who failed to fulfil his potential. Bush is far worse, an irresponsible, incompetent big spender who manipulates information to promote his foreign policy fantasies. Sadly, it turns out that the adults left town when Bush was elected.
Doug Bandow, a former special assistant to president Ronald Reagan, is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a member of the Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy and a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, DC.
fools multiply words.
I don't believe the "less mature" bit, but the stuff about the spending -- W's spent more than Clinton by far -- isn't a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact. We're going to have to pay, one way or the other, for W's appalling fiscal recklessness.
I don't believe the "less mature" bit, but the stuff about the spending -- W's spent more than Clinton by far -- isn't a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact. We're going to have to pay, one way or the other, for W's appalling fiscal recklessness.
It's such a surprise that you posted this.
NOT.
This is utterly ridiculous. I can be rough on W for a couple of things, but no one can take away from him the fact that he is honorable, well intentioned, faithful, and admirable, and principled. He loves God, this country, and the Office of the Presidency. He's the kind of person I would want in my family.
I'm seeing this sort of thing a lot: Hard-core lefties crying crocodile tears that Bush "isn't a conservative."
Like they really want him to be.
Their real agenda is to damage American foreign policy, and to weaken America in general.
We are at war and were in a Recession. Sorry this comparison on spending is intellectually dishonest. With full employment, peace and no major crises what did Clinton have ANY thing to spend on!!!! ALSO must of skipped your junior high civics class. CONGRESS, then and now, Controls the purse. Blaming Bush is just another example of the Hate Bush ALWAYS nonsense put out by those DESPERATE to cling to their 9-10 ideology in a post 9-11 world.
You probably think Miers is a brilliant pick for the Supreme Court.
That didn't make the Medicare monstrosity necessary - - or the Karl MArx socialist response to KArtina.
That's a laugh, isn't it? President Bush has spent most of his term cleaning up the legacy of the previous occupant of the office, i.e. 9-11, Iraq, etc.
I think you're a troll.
You're too kind.
LOL..........if I get banned, I want it to be on somebody worth more than this thing! :-)
Says a country smaller than California.
Nice blokes and all that but they should really stick to what they do best -- being the english-speaking comedy relief for south of the Equator.
Funny folk, but please, I hope they don't think their opinion actually MATTERS.
You think everyone is a troll.
And you use your longevity here as a lever to intimidate the Mods (although I think you are a mod).
You are quite the bully. I have seen you get people banned for disagreeing with you.
Not nice.
Horse Hockey!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.