Posted on 06/17/2003 5:07:22 AM PDT by SUSSA
Democrats may be worried that George Bush is unbeatable in 2004, but President Bush’s strength is good news for progressives. No president since LBJ has been as successful in expanding government and increasing the size and scope of social programs as this president. Presidents Carter and Clinton didn’t even come close to matching President Bush’s accomplishments in expanding government social programs. George Bush increased government size and spending more in his first two years than Bill Clinton did in his first six years. By the end of this year, he will have expanded government more than Bill Clinton did in his entire eight-year administration.
To be fair, Bill Clinton had to fight the conservatives in Congress who threw up every roadblock they could muster to thwart his progressive agenda. George Bush has not only silenced the conservative wing of the Republican Party, he has ground them into pulp and made them toothless tigers.
There is no longer any serious talk about making government smaller or eliminating government departments or programs. Smaller government used to be the bedrock principal of the Republican Party. President Bush changed that and is pushing Republicans in Congress not just to accept bigger government, but to embrace it.
Instead of eliminating the Education Department, George Bush almost doubled its size and pushed through the largest increase in funding the department ever enjoyed. He and Ted Kennedy worked closely together to make sure that the federal government also has more power over local schools than ever before.
The testing mandated by the education bill, and the mandate that schools meet minimum standards is a brilliant maneuver that will demand the standards and the tests be controlled centrally from Washington. No one will be able to oppose national standards and a national testing system. Without national standards, testing is subjective and worthless. National standards and a standardized national test will require local schools teach to the test. That means Washington will be dictating the curriculum in every school in America. Bill Clinton and Al Gore couldn’t even dream of accomplishing this much progress.
In other areas President Bush also out performed President Clinton. He expanded other programs the Contract With America targeted for elimination. He expanded Americorps, the Peace Corps, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and Head Start.
Working closely with progressive Republicans and Democrats, George Bush passed the farm bill that dismantled the Freedom to Farm Act that conservative Republicans pushed through Congress, and President Clinton signed, in 1996. This new legislation boosts farm spending to record levels. President Bush’s farm bill not only increased old subsidies, it created new subsidies our farmers never had before. No Democrat president could have pushed this legislation through a Republican controlled Congress. The conservative wing of the party still holds some powerful positions in Congress, especially in the House. They were proud of the Freedom to Farm Act and would have fought tooth and nail with a Democrat president to keep it in place. They caved in to President Bush without even a hint of a fight. President Bush effectively cut the conservatives in Congress off at the knees on this legislation and on most of their domestic agenda. He rules the Republican Party with an iron fist and conservatives are unable to out maneuver him.
President Bush signed the Campaign Finance Reform bill into law. Conservative Republicans in Congress are still quietly seething about how he steamrollered them on this. President Bush is also leading the fight to expand Medicare, add prescription drug coverage and mandate mental health coverage. Conservatives kept Presidents Carter and Clinton from adding these entitlements to Medicare. With President Bush pushing the agenda, they aren’t even pretending to oppose these additions.
The president is also leading the fight to extend the child tax credit to low income families excluded from the latest tax cut. He figuratively bitch-slapped Tom Delay and his conservative cohorts who threatened to derail the expanded credit, urging the Republicans to pass the bill quickly and send it to him for his signature. While progressive Republicans like to claim President Bush is following President Reagan’s vision for America, he is actually following President Nixon’s agenda to the letter. President Nixon never tried to eliminate any government program or agency. He expanded government as much as he could. Few people remember that it was President Nixon who created the Environmental Protection Agency, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the National Endowment for the Arts. Fewer still remember that it was President Nixon who tied Social Security benefits to the cost of living. President Bush is surpassing President Nixon in advancing progressive social policy.
President Bush is also making talk radio safe for progressives. Hosts who would have railed against President Clinton, or any Democrat, for pushing the progressive agenda President Bush is implementing, excuse this president for it. Many of them attack any conservative who calls to point out that President Bush is a progressive. Even Rush Limbaugh is leery of taking on this president. While he occasionally offers some mild criticism of the president, he always follows that criticism by offering excuses for the president’s actions and progressive domestic agenda. This is partially due to the attacks that come from the Bush cultists any time anyone is anything but worshipful of their guy. Like Democrats who refused to believe that President Clinton was capable of doing any wrong, there is a group of Republicans who would support President Bush no matter how far left he governs. They attack anyone and any group who points out that President Bush is not conservative. Many of these people are domestic progressives who like big government and benefit from government programs. They call themselves conservatives; many of them really think they are conservatives. In fact, they support progressive social programs and most benefit from them. They are critical of the poor who receive government help, but enjoy generous government subsidies of their own lifestyles. Many talk show hosts fall into this category themselves.
The other reason even real conservatives are leery of voicing anything except the mildest criticism of President Bush is they fear retaliation from the administration. They fear being cut off from the information loop. They fear being dropped from the administration’s fax and E-mail grapevine. Their professional status is greatly enhanced by access to administration sources and President Bush is not shy about diminishing or eliminating that access for anyone who puts their principals ahead of support for his agenda.
All things considered, progressives are much better off with President Bush in office than they would be with any of his Democrat challengers. No Democrat on the scene today can come close to matching President Bush’s ability to advance the progressive agenda and marginalize the conservatives in the Republican Party. Four more years of a Bush administration will produce progressive gains that are only matched by FDR’s accomplishments. Rather than being disappointed that they don’t have a Democrat in the presidency, progressives should be thankful they have an ideological soul mate in office. For progressives the cry should be “FOUR MORE YEARS!”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Bender is a freelance writer from Dallas, Texas. His columns have appeared in The Dallas Morning News, Ether Zone, Right Magazine, The Sierra Times, USA Daily and other print and online publications. Your feedback is welcome.
This is true. IF anyone had bothered to look at his Texas record they would have understood immediately that Bush likes to spend money. Lots of it. I live in Texas, and the budget growth under his administration was simply staggering.
But in Texas, no one cared, partially because state government just isn't a big concern, and partially because the economy was good and taxes never had to be raised.
Bush would never be able to get away with many of his policies as President were it not for the war. I have a pretty good sense of his supporters, and I can tell you that nothing matters more to them than national honor and security. I feel the same way. This trumps all else, and gives Bush a wide berth to massively increase spending, further federalize education, sign a viciously unconstitutional campaign "reform" bill, and so on.
Now having said all that, I will almost certainly vote for Bush in 2004, unless he neames a pro-choice running mate. I doubt it will be an issue.
She was an audio taper of a "whistle blower" Clintoon's whistle to be exact. and why in the world should the president be concerned about some low level employee who was "fired" by her agency. as though that is all he had to worry about. Right
And, if you say it ain't so, check the current State Dept.'s spokesman. He had exactly the same job under Clinton. I suspect he resigned on Jan 19 and he was then re-hired on Jan. 20.
If you want me to say that Clinton/Bush fired Linda Tripp... then I have no problem with that.
I despise Bush's immigration and education policies, but what's the matter with supporting the only democracy in the Middle East? Would you rather him have a pro-Arab dictatorship policy?
This is certainly true. Bush has re-aligned his party.
I stand here in amazement, reading these posts and wondering why all the venom.
It would seem many have little reality as to what era, and with just how many factions in America, we are living with.
A human condition, I'm afraid.
Who would these "true conservatives" vote for?
If I remember correctly, Pat Buchanan was shot off the radar screen, along with Phil Grahm, Tom DeLay, Ron Paul, Dick Armey, and Bob Barr etc etc.
This is what you said:
Did anyone mention that he fired Linda Tripp as soon as he got himself installed at his desk?
That's a flat out lie.
But keep using it to push your liberal agenda.
Thank you for supporting my point. W couldn't give a rat's ass about 'little people', like Linda. Even little people that risked their career to help him win the presidency.
1)You don't believe federal taxes should be cut for any reason or,
2) It is possible you believe only your pet federal programs should be cut, and
3)You don't believe the states have the right to govern as they see fit.
Lowering taxes while spending more is INSANITY.
Lowering taxes is never a bad thing!
You are right about one thing. There is definitely some INSANITY going on here.
Oh, good. Then after Rush's show, you'll be able to answer deport's question, right? As soon as Rush tells you what to say, right?
None, for as long as we aren't pushed to fight their wars while paying them to watch us fight. But this should be (and was) the topic of another/many others thread.
So what has Bush suddenly done to cause this barrage to raise the Bush 'negatives'? The only change I can see is the Bush effort for peace with his roadmap. Anyone see anything else? But let's see if Bush straightens out and gets back to being 'a war time President', if the negative barrage will cease.
Well, there you have the problem: they have NO candidate; they never voted for Bush, never even thought about it, and won't next time.
In the meantime, they intend to divide as much as they can.
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.