Bush's Report Card

Conservative ire with President Bush has recently reached a fever pitch as the godfather of the conservative movement, Bill Buckley, unleashed a surprisingly harsh litany of critiques against the president. When asked about Bush’s legacy, Buckley stated rather baldly, “There will be no legacy for Mr. Bush. I don't believe a successor would re-enunciate the words that he used in his second inaugural address, because they were too ambitious, so therefore I think his legacy is indecipherable.” Recent headlines have mirrored this pique among the conservative block with the present administration, “Bush’s Base Betrayal”, “The Conservative Revolt” and “Conservative Anger Grows Over Bush’s Foreign Policy”. When attempting to size-up the administration, it seems conservatives focus on one of the three “pillars of conservatism” and assess Bush according to his handling of each. The first of the three pillars, as I see it, consists of social issues like abortion, gay “marriage” and embryonic stem-cell research. The second is foreign policy, in particular, the war on terror and how that war is being conducted in light of events in Iraq. And finally, the third pillar of conservatism is economic policy. Although I have a high degree of respect for the president, and support much of what he has set about to do, I would be less than candid if I were to gloss over the fiscal lacerations inflicted on our economy by a Republican administration and Congress, something of a scandal to say the least. His stance on social issues and his foreign policy merit a more positive evaluation. I’ll dish out to Bush two “cheers” and one “jeer”.

A simple look at the numbers of the past 5 ½ years will reveal some disturbing trends and forecasts for our nation’s economy. The Bush era has so far overseen and sanctioned a 45% increase in federal spending, and we still have 2 ½ years to go, with no sign of slowing down in sight! To draw up a comparison, President Clinton presided over a spending jump of a “paltry” 32%, and that was over his entire two-term presidency. We currently live under the shadow of the largest federal government in the history of the nation. In 2005, federal spending careened to an astounding $2.7 trillion. Bush has shown a lamentable fondness for Keynesian economic policies that have been proven time and again ineffectual. He has enthusiastically embraced reckless federal spending while pushing for an increase in the money supply via his proxies at the Federal Reserve, resulting in soaring inflation rates. President Bush seems incapable stopping and/or unwilling to reign in the extravagant spending of his Republican Congress, having vetoed only one bill in the past 5 ½ years. The one bright spot on Bush’s fiscal track record is his tax cuts, which has clearly helped nudge the economy toward positive growth. But as usual, the devil is in the details. The lifeblood of government spending flows from two veins, taxes and that which the government borrows and inflates. On the latter, the borrowing and inflating, the present administration has done little to curb its spendthrift proclivities. Unfortunately, the negative vastly outweighs the positive in this arena of political analysis. The president has simply not made fiscal responsibility a priority, shirking a traditional banner of the conservative movement. It’s a tragic political irony of epic proportions: Republicans finally control Washington as never before, thanks in large part to the fiscal conservatives who, as it turns out, placed false hopes in the Bush ascendancy. One of the Republican Party’s traditional battle cries aimed at rallying its base to the polls during the insufferable era of Democratic dominion in DC was the promise to reign in Congress’ insatiable check-writing impulses. If the Bush and Congressional shopping sprees continue through 2008, he will go down in history as the nation’s most profligate president. Conservatives are justified in their disappointment here. Grade: D

Moving on to the second pillar of conservatism, foreign policy and the war on terror, President Bush deserves a more propitious analysis. In stark contrast to the utopian platitudes and naïve world-view of the leftists in the United Nations and European Union, Bush is driven by a refreshing realism and pragmatism, the same pragmatism which has over the centuries, distinguished the United States from other nations. Margaret Thatcher memorably advised, “The ultimate test of statesmanship is what to do in the face of war” and that this “requires a continuous investment in defense and a constant resolution to resist aggression”. Who could deny that Bush has, since 9-11, enthusiastically embraced this wise precept from one of the colossuses of the anti-communist leadership of the 1980s? Ample room exists for criticism of the many tactical decisions made by the administration since the war on terror commenced. However, feckless UN resolutions, policies of détente, and half-measures of irresolute military force have proven embarrassingly impotent in dealing with Islamofascist terrorists bent on merciless destruction and slaughter, rooted in what George Weigel has aptly identified as anarchic-nihilism wedded to a skewed monotheism. Such an unorthodox enemy demands a particularly forceful answer from the West, and the United States, with a select smattering of European nations that also understand this reality, have banded together to face this danger. Fortunately, President Bush seems immune to the shrills of Sirens pent up in the United Nations, who tantrum on about the supposed violation of international law by a “unilateral” United States. That the United States is a member of the United Nations by no means implies that it must sacrifice its right as a sovereign nation to defend itself from attacks. Most scholars on international law see such law as having to do more with contracts and treaties and little or nothing to do with any legislative powers of enforcement. It is important to remember that a country's foreign policy is inextricably interwoven with its unique domestic policies. From this point of view, international relations should always be seen through the prism of a nation’s domestic particularities. There is NO official enforcer of international law, despite what Kofi Annan might wish to believe or project. While the United Nations continues to decay from within as a result of its own undeniable corruption and growing irrelevance, Bush has proven himself a reluctant but willing warrior, ready and able to unleash the full fury of the United States military against the harbingers of terrorism and oppression ensconced in the scorching desert sands of Arabia. Fearless of terrorist threats from abroad and political reprisal at home from scheming politicians seeking to capitalize on perceived or magnified chinks in his armor, President Bush has proven himself resolute, steadfast and unflinching in this war. He saw that something had to be done, and he took action. Grade: A-
Incompetence personified, Kofi Annan

Finally, the spotlight must fall on the conservative “pillar” of social issues. On this score, I once again give the president high marks. My only complaint is that I would like to see Mr. Bush throw his considerable political weight and influence behind struggling candidates in state primaries running against well-funded liberal Republicans. More than once, he has taken an “ends justifies the means approach” in endorsing more “viable”, albeit more liberal, Republicans when faced with tough opposition from the Democratic side. He’s willing to tolerate an ideologically diluted Party so long as he can hold on to his majority in Congress. There is something to be said however for sacrificing principle for politics and I think he could do better giving precedence to conservatism over Republicanism. But when the chips are down, Bush has been remarkably consistent in defending the dignity of the person and the traditional family. He is unabashedly pro-life and, given the political reality, we could hardly ask for anyone better at the present. For those who, like myself, consider the defense of the social fabric of our polis as the defining issue of our time, President Bush is a colossus to our movement. He has opposed the UN’s relentless and pernicious population control measures, he vetoed Congress’ latest attempt to sabotage human life at its earliest stage for experimentation purposes, he signed into law the twice-vetoed law banning the gruesome partial-birth abortion procedure, he backed the ill-fated Constitutional amendment proposal which sought to enshrine marriage as a unique institution in society, consisting exclusively in the union between one man and one woman, and finally, he has installed two extremely high-voltage, conservative Supreme Court Justices with sparkling credentials and frighteningly powerful intellects. The list could go on, but these rank among the most glaring examples of President Bush’s undeniable pro-life vision. The astoundingly high level of poisonous vitriol spewed at Bush by the far left, a motley crew of anti-Christian, degenerate atheists, only serves to crystallize my admiration for the man. I might not always agree with how he goes about it, but in the end, he’s someone I can trust. At the National Prayer Breakfast, President Bush offered these observations on the Catholic Church, "Some people believe you cannot distinguish between right and wrong. The Catholic Church rejects such a pessimistic view of human nature, and offers a vision of human freedom and dignity rooted in the same self-evident truths of America's Founding. ... Freedom is a gift from the Almighty, and because it is universal, our Creator has written it into all nature. To maintain this freedom, societies need high moral standards.” Enough said. Grade: A-

President Bush is a man who says what he means and means what he says. For all his shortcomings and fiscal foibles, he is a man of character and integrity. He still has 2 ½ years in office, time enough perhaps to make some reversals in his wayward economic policies. One can only hope. On the positive side, the president has fulfilled his most important campaign promise of 2000, to restore honor and decency to the office of President of the United States. For this reason, conservatives, Americans, of all stripes should be grateful. Terrorists who wished to test our resolve and watch us scatter like “paper tigers” as Osama bin Laden once derided us, have learned a lesson in the school of the Bush Doctrine. Cantankerous conservative commentators should give Bush credit where credit is due, curb their critique and tincture it with some gestures of appreciation and gratitude.