PDA

View Full Version : Bush II: A leftist?



CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-06-2010, 12:12 AM
I was reading Beck's book, and in it he argues that Bush II spent like, and I quote, "A drunken FDR", and that Bush was the biggest spender since LBJ. He compares spending under Bush and the deficit under him to Clinton, and shows it was much higher under Bush.

Do you think that, despite his foreign policy hawkishness, he was, at least economically, a closet Left Winger?

Rockntractor
12-06-2010, 12:17 AM
I was reading Beck's book, and in it he argues that Bush II spent like, and I quote, "A drunken FDR". He compares Bush's spending and the national debt under him to Clinton, and shows it was much higher under Bush.

Do you think that, despite his foreign policy hawkishness, he was, at least economically, a closet Left Winger?

I would agree with most of that.I call them liberal spending policies, but that is just my choice of words. Left wing or right wing doesn't accurately describe anyone. Liberal policies proposed by anyone Democrat or Republican are bad for the country. Bush was a mix of liberal and conservative, so was his dad.

Adam Wood
12-06-2010, 02:13 AM
I personally differentiate between "liberal" and "Leftist." Liberals are generally well-intentioned, if misguided, and want the government to help people. Leftists are DU types: complete statists who are pretty much complete tyrannical socialists.

I would definitely consider Bush a liberal on spending. If you had been around here back in about 2005, you would have seen a sizable amount of complaining about Bush's spending.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-06-2010, 04:12 AM
I personally differentiate between "liberal" and "Leftist." Liberals are generally well-intentioned, if misguided, and want the government to help people. Leftists are DU types: complete statists who are pretty much complete tyrannical socialists.

I would definitely consider Bush a liberal on spending. If you had been around here back in about 2005, you would have seen a sizable amount of complaining about Bush's spending.

Well, if we are going to differentiate between a Liberal, and a Leftist, I would say then that we've only had two LEFTIST Presidents in our history: Woodrow Wilson, and Obama.

I know a lot of people probably dislike them here, but I do think that for their faults or misguided ideas, TR, FDR and LBJ did have good intentions, and did feel the government could help people. Also, neither of them were fundamentally opposed to our system of government, whereas Wilson and Obama were/are. Wilson wrote quite a few papers before he was President condemning our system, and Obama's statements are a matter of public record.

Also, Wilson locked up those who simply disagreed with him on the war. He also demonized the Germans to the point of literally dehumanizing them, depicting them as base, evil animals. He also locked up communists like Eugene Debs. I don't even think Wilson was a Lefitst; He was just a tyrant who wanted to reshape the US, and the world, in his image. However, he did do one good thing: He started the Cold War in a sense by refusing to recognize the USSR and even had us helping the Whites against the Reds in the Russian Civil War.

John Adams also had very tyrannical characteristics, even though he was a Founding Father. He signed the Alien & Sedition Acts, which put forth that you could be jailed for saying anything "untrue" about the President or government. I recall hearing of a senator who was jailed just for mocking Adams' weight.

FDR, while locking up the Japanese was a moral and ethical wrong in retrospect, did it as a matter of national security. It was also a less politically correct world then, and people HATED the Japanese, so few really felt it was wrong then. He could've locked up a lot more people had he wanted to--There was a member of the NY Times who revealed FDR's secret plans which would come into effect if we went to war with Germany DAYS BEFORE Pearl Harbor.

Bleda
12-06-2010, 05:20 AM
I think he's personally conservative (or, at least, right-wing), but he governed as a “centrist.” That is, leftist on some issues and rightist on others. He did once say that he went against his free-market instincts.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/11/bush-i-went-against-my-freemarket-instincts.html


“I Went Against My Free-Market Instincts”

That’s what former President Bush said today in explaining why he signed off on the bailout for Wall Street…calling the decision “one of the most difficult of his presidency.”

The former President made the remarks at the unveiling of the George W. Bush Presidential Center at Southern Methodist University.

“I went against my free-market instincts and approved a temporary government intervention to unfreeze the credit markets so that we could avoid a major global depression,” Bush said.

And without mentioning President Obama by name the former President did have some rather pointed comments for the current Administration claiming that generally “history shows that the greater threat to prosperity is not too little government involvement, but too much.”

Bush, who as President also signed off on massive aid to the auto industry, warned against a government takeover of the economy fearing it would eliminate free-market enterprise. “As the world recovers, we are going to face the temptation to replace the risk and reward model of the private sector with the blunt instruments of government spending and control.”

Constitutionally Speaking
12-06-2010, 05:54 AM
I was reading Beck's book, and in it he argues that Bush II spent like, and I quote, "A drunken FDR", and that Bush was the biggest spender since LBJ. He compares spending under Bush and the deficit under him to Clinton, and shows it was much higher under Bush.

Do you think that, despite his foreign policy hawkishness, he was, at least economically, a closet Left Winger?


A conservative would NEVER start a huge entitlement program.

A conservative would Never initiate an entirely new but utterly redundant cabinet level department.

A conservative would never intervened in the free market in order to save it. A conservative would have know that the free market needs to be FREE in order to work and intervention only compounds the problems, long - term.


The whole idea of "compassionate conservative" is extremely offensive to me. It assumes that conservatism is not compassionate in the first place.