Prof Bainbridge Is Mad As Hell
Our good friend Professor Bainbridge has had enough of George W. Bush:
It’s time for us conservatives to face facts. George W. Bush has pissed away the conservative moment by pursuing a war of choice via policies that border on the criminally incompetent. We control the White House, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and (more-or-less) the judiciary for one of the few times in my nearly 5 decades, but what have we really accomplished? Is government smaller? Have we hacked away at the nanny state? Are the unborn any more protected? Have we really set the stage for a durable conservative majority?
Meanwhile, Bush continues to insult our intelligence with tripe like this:
“Our troops know that they’re fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere to protect their fellow Americans from a savage enemy,” Bush said in his weekly radio address. {Ed: Full text here}
“They know that if we do not confront these evil men abroad, we will have to face them one day in our own cities and streets, and they know that the safety and security of every American is at stake in this war,” he said.
I guess that’s all he has left. After all, if Iraq’s alleged WMD programs were the casus belli, why aren’t we at war with Iran and North Korea? Not to mention Pakistan, which remains the odds-on favorite to supply the Islamofascists with a working nuke. If Saddam’s cruelty to his own people was the casus belli, why aren’t we taking out Kim Jong Il or any number of other nasty dictators? Indeed, what happened to the W of 2000, who correctly proclaimed nation building a failed cause and an inappropriate use of American military might? And why are we apparently going to allow the Islamists to write a more significant role for Islamic law into the new Iraqi constitution? If throwing a scare into the Saudis was the policy, so as to get them to rethink their deals with the jihadists, which has always struck me as the best rationale for the war, have things really improved on that front?
Okay, well, there are some good points there – the flypaper strategy argument never was the strongest one to deploy, and I’m not sure why Bush continues to hammer on it; nor am I a big fan of the increasing likelihood that Islamic law will play a significant role in the new Iraq.
Yet there have been accomplishments, more than our good friend lets on. Most obviously, Saddam Hussein’s brutal regime is gone, with its subsidies of suicide bombers, mass murder, and totalitarian mindset. We know why we don’t take out Kim Jong Il, Professor; and it was precisely to avoid such a problem with Saddam that made a move now so necessary.
What about on the domestic front? We have a strong economy, thanks in large part to the Bush tax cuts, a good Supreme Court nominee who will be confirmed shortly, the CAFTA Agreement, and a host of other accomplishments. Indeed, the Washington Post was moved recently to write of a flurry of GOP victories.
Does that mean I agree with Bush and the Republicans on every item on their agenda? Of course not; Bainbridge’s criticisms of the nanny state and the size of government are right on target. Iraq, while not where anyone wants it to be, is not the complete disaster its critics make it out to be, however, and I disagree that it was a war of choice. The only choice was whether to do it now or later, and George W. Bush is to be commended for finally forcing the U.N. to enforce its own resolutions. Let us not forget, either, the rejection of Syrian domination by Lebanon would not have occurred without Iraq.
I can understand my good friend’s frustration, but we have to keep our eye on the ball. I’m as good a conservative as the next guy, but frankly, victory in the War on Terror and in Iraq is far more important than any momentary setbacks the conservative movement may suffer as a result. If the price of victory in Iraq is Democratic dominance of government for the next two decades, it’s a price I would gladly pay. Our enemies are the terrorists, not our rivals across the aisle.
UPDATE 4:53 p.m. central: One of the questions asked by Prof Bainbridge is, “Why we are allowing the Islamists to write a more significant role for Islamic law into the Iraqi constitution?” Jeff at the Bernoulli Effect says it’s worse than that: we’re not allowing, we’re pushing. Indeed, there is a sense that the consitutional process is being rushed for the consumption of the American public. Thus does the harmful rhetoric of MoDo, Frank Rich, Cindy Sheehan, and the Kossacks begin to show its ill effects…
UPDATE 2 9:27 p.m. central: More from the redoubtable Rick Moran…
Going All Wobbly
Looks like somebody’s spiked Prof. Bainbridge’s wine with a good dose of leftism. He has…
If those are the only domestic accomplishments you can cite, it is a pretty meager record. Did the Bush tax cuts help the economy in the short run? Along with the Fed lowering interest rates to record levels — which probably did more to stimulate the economy — yes, they certainly did. However, the government can always stimulate the economy by borrowing money — the Weimer Republic was pretty good at that — but once Asian central banks stop paying for the tax cuts by buying government paper, I’m not sure how you would view the Bush tax cuts.
CAFTA? I’m all for it — I wish Bush were as committed to free trade as Clinton was. But with Central America being a miniscule part of our trade, it will never amount to much. John Roberts? Not confirmed yet. The energy bill was a giveback to various constituencies and even Bush doesn’t claim that it will do much to solve the energy problem. (Not to mention that it was above Bush’s ammounced veto limit, and that last week the administration relaxed fuel economy standards to benefit Hummers, Excursions. etc.).
If you want to compare what has been achieved in the first 4 1/2 years of the Clinton administration — or, for that matter, the Reagan years – I don’t see how you can find much to praise.
Well, peter, you may have a point; I could turn the domestic equation upside-down and say, what domestic accomplishment did Bush really go for and not get, other than, of course, the biggie of Social Security reform, which does appear dead at the moment.
Of course, this meagerness, as you say, of domestic accomplishments is not surprising, giving that this is the President chosen by Providence to preside in the post-9/11 era. Foreign affairs so dominate our lives that domestic conservatism is not my number one priority at the moment.
Finally, let me throw out one more domestic accomplishment; no major terrorist incidents on our shores in the 4 years since that horrible September day…that’s a pretty good accomplishment, right there…
Agreed — although we don’t know if the lack of a terrorist event since 9/11 is due to Bush or to the fact that nothing was attempted, I will give Bush the benefit of the doubt. However, I don’t think that pursuing terrorists and advancing domestic agenda are mutually exclusive. We have been at war before without domestic policy coming to a standstill. Geez, even Nixon achieved a lot while the VietNam war was at its height. I think that the Iraq war is sort of a Gentleman’s C for Bush — being a war president was enough to get him elected, so he didn’t have to spend much time on his other courses.
I’m not getting wobbly and defeatist, but I am irritated by the sense of missed opportunities in Iraq. I realize it may be a case of “geez I could hit .280 with a little practice”, i.e, effectively rebuilding an entire country while trying to defeat a fanatical enemy is a lot harder than it looks from our armchairs. Fortunately for us conservatives, it’s an even greater missed opportunity for the Dems.
Good point, Mark, on the price of victory in Iraq. I remember my prayer on election night, “God, please, I’ll trade you eight years of Hillary down the road if you’ll just give me GWB now…”
Your prayer may be answered yet…but yes, the irritation is palpable. I’m hoping the Saddam trial starts soon…it might shake of some of the spreading negativity…
“Indeed, there is a sense that the consitutional process is being rushed for the consumption of the American public. Thus does the harmful rhetoric of MoDo, Frank Rich, Cindy Sheehan, and the Kossacks begin to show its ill effects…”
ah, the stab-in-the-back theory rears its lovely head once again…if we succeed, it’s all because of us! but if we fail, it’s because the other side didn’t support us! If DailyKos weren’t around, there’d be no rampant Islamic fundamentalism in Iraq right now, yes…
No, of course not; I see your point, and I’m not saying that without the Kos, MoDo, et al, that things would be going swimmingly. What I am saying is this: whipping up negativity, relentlessly, and unfairly (i.e., without admitting anything positivie at all is coming from our Iraq efforts) is bound to affect the political climate sooner or later, particularly when the relentless drumbeat of doom is sounding, as it does, every day without fail, from the columnists of the New York Times, as an example. As the defeatism takes hold, the political pressure rises to withdraw the troops as soon as possible; and that means, get that constitution done, right or wrong, quickly…
peter, while
I disagree with many of your pointsI am less concerned about the lack of domestic accomplishments than you are, I do admire the way you putthemyour concerns – Iraq as a ‘Gentleman’s C’ for Bush – I quite like that. Well done…[...] You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your ownsite. [...]
The Dregs of Summer. (Politically Speaking)
Congress is in recess, the President is on vacation (again), much of Washington is on the Delaware Shore, heck even The Note is away. So there is little, or nothing going on in Washington. Cindy Sheehan and how hard the Democrats will blast away at J…