Bill Clinton explained recently why the glory days of "conservatism" might quickly be winding down. The Republican agenda, he shows, is unprincipled and floundering. It is largely based on BORROWING money from foreign dictators and communists to pay for Iraq, Afghanistan, Bush's tax cuts for the rich, and the Hurricane Katrina aftermath. That plan is, frankly, not a plan at all.
Republicans running for re-election are caught in a catch-22 — abandon Bush since he has never had a "conservative" economic plan for America, or stick with him and abandon everything you stand for --the very things that brought you into power. Since Republicans are like a rudderless Titanic with no means of correcting course, it is easy to predict exactly what will happen over the next year:
As the 2006 elections becomes imminent a couple hundred billion will be BORROWED responding to Katrina, a couple hundred billion more will be BORROWED on the quagmire in Iraq, the tax cuts for the rich will remain largely intact (if not expanded ONLY for the very, very rich) paid for by BORROWING more money from foreign dictators, the deficit naturally will mushroom, Government will be made even larger than it already is, and then, to boot, Republicans will propose ELIMINATING or cutting back social programs for Americans as a means to pay for some of this irresponsible borrowing from foreign dictators to pay for irresponsible priorities --which only help the rich.
None of this can possibly be good for America, especially as the GOP keeps pushing the debt off to future generations. Here is why the GOP lacks a real agenda to move America forward:
If you count Hurricane Katrina as the third crisis of Bush's term - Sept. 11, 2001 being the first and the occupation by choice of Iraq being the man-made second-- Bush has once again refused to call for any real sacrifice. He never once vetoed a pork-filled bill from Tom Delay and the Republicans voting with him in lock-step. Never has Bush shown an example of personal sacrifice, for instance by encouraging his drunkard daughters to get on board and join the war effort. Just more BORROWING from more Islamist and communist dictators to buy more time.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - The Searcher
I also find myself wondering how the Republicans have a hope in hell of getting anyone elected next term. I think we could do with a change, or even better, more political parties.
2 - Nancy
I'm glad the Pubs finally are going to get the spotlight shown on them standing with their pants down economically, so to speak, but the problem is, the Dems are even more rudderless. Talk about a house in disorder! The only people with an unwavering agenda are the neo-nazi neocons & the religious reich; all the pols all across the spectrum are quivering like melting jello, afraid to take a stand for anything, lest they offend, & I haven't noticed anyone yet I'd vote for on either side - or no side. At least, no one's declared that I'd cross the street to spit on.
3 - Dave Nalle
Balletshooz, you live in a lovely delusional universe. What kind of record do Democrats have to run on that would put them ahead of the Republicans? Neither party has done much to boast about in the last few years. It's already been demonstrated that campaigns based solely on negativism don't work. What the Republicans have over the Democrats in the next election is at least a handful of potential candidates who can put themselves forward as reasonable compromises with praiseworthy personal records. The Democrats can't offer even that.
Dave
4 - balletshooz
What kind of record do Democrats have to run on that would put them ahead of the Republicans?
well, since every bill the Democrats put forward is killed without debate by the republicans, as if we are in a one-party state, the only way America will know if the Democrats are better is to kick the Republican obstructionists out.
I disagree that republicans have anyone respectable after Bush. The Democrats have dozens.
5 - Eric Berlin
Dave - This piece is about the Republican agenda, not the Democratic one. Indeed, with Republicans in control for the past four years, the spotlight clearly should be on them.
I agree that this administration is pretty far from what conservative used to mean: cautious foreign policy, an aversion to "nation building," fiscal discipline, balanced budgets, etc. All pretty much the opposite of what this regime has gone after.
I continue to think that Katrina really pierces at the sole throughline of the Bush Administration's policies: national security and defense of its citizens. If it cannot provide that function in at least an adequate manner, it opens them up to the harsh spotlight on a host of other issues and policies.
6 - Eric Berlin
Balletshooz -- I'm getting a dead link on your WaPo reference.
7 - Balletshooz
Eric, thanks I fixed it.
8 - Al Barger
Balletshooz, this is much better than a lot of the stuff you write. It actually makes a coherent argument about actual policies.
You're at least broadly right that Bush and the Republican Congress has been a dozen kinds of irresponsible. In theory, they should get their plowshares cleaned in the next election.
The problem is, as Monsieur Nalle points out, that the Democrats just don't have any credibility whatsoever to be trusted as more responsible public stewards.
About the time that Tom DeLay declared that there was no more fat to cut in the federal budget though, I pretty well decided they Democrats might as well take the Congress back. How could they possibly do worse?
Thing is, I'm afraid that this will not turn out to be a merely rhetorical question.
9 - Balletshooz
hey al. coming from someone that usually blows a gasket when they read my article. thanks. im not sure whether it is better to enrage cons/libertarians or to write more reasoned articles on policy. but anyways, since flamethrowing from behind a keyboard is sort of pointless and cowardly the latter is probably a better idea, of course with a few digs against the other side of the aisle thrown in as well.
10 - Al Barger
Oh, a few digs and a bit of creative namecalling is fine- if it's connected to a reasonable point. I would take exception to some of what you say here, but a lot of seems perfectly reasonable.
Unlike hatin' on the governor's wayward son, this stuff is relevant and might actually cause someone on the fence to change their mind, and decide to throw the bums out.
11 - Eric Berlin
Maybe I'm biased (ha ha...) but I think Clinton showed that Democratic leadership can be responsible, centrist, and creatively progressively.
Even Howard Dean, often criticized as a wild-eyed liberal (which is not, in truth, the truth) presided over balanced budgets in Vermont! Therefore, he's perfectly within his rights to declare the Democrats as the party that is responsible with the taxpayer's money.
As far as the Dems not having a coherent agenda, there's plenty of time to get a campaign together for '06. Theirs is a minority party at present, so all they have to do, sadly, is decide how many "no" votes to throw at Roberts, etc. while the overall outcome isn't nearly in question.
12 - Lono
good piece:
I love to tease my Republican friends about how I would LOVE a Republican candidate. you know, fiscal responsibility & staying out of people's lives.
this president is spend spend spend spend, and the Patriot act combines nicely with Rove's monster homophobia to create the nosiest administration in history.
the next conservative who tells me 'but Democrats love big government, I am going to stab in the neck.
13 - phil
every time see old bill i can't help but think of him getting his cigar sucked on by a kid...ok...a much younger employee... while the world went to hell in a hand basket
14 - Eric Berlin
Yes Lono, Big Government Conservatism was invented during by the Bush Administration.
15 - gonzo marx
strange..i think of a balanced budget...with surplus'..
i think of the federal government being shrunk by over 40%
i think of a good economy
i think of the US being Respected as THe superpower
there were also many things i didn't like, such as the WTO and NAFTA and offshoring just startnig to rear it's ugly head
then there was that wonder ful multi-year 42 billion dollar witch hunt that turned up nothing about what it wa started about, so it kept fishing into anything it could find...while that handbasket was being wover by those that woudl weild totalitarian power, grow the government to record size and destroy the surplus' and haul our Nation into record deficits while throwing aside the international Respect we had earned...
just me, i guess....
Excelsior!
16 - phil
I think some people have more respect for our nation now that our president isn't fucking the help
17 - gonzo marx
instead he begins pre-emptive wars...and makes "dead or alive" statements about the person that masterminded the attack on us..you remember...bin Laden
and still hasn't caught him?
check the Facts...when the US invaded Afghanistan in retaliation, the entire world was behind us...not so since Iraq
i also notice you do not choose to deal with the economic or size of government Issues i bring up
fascinating...
Excelsior!
18 - The Duke
Balanced budgets in Vermont?
That must have been hard. Tax the rich NYC transplants to support the social welfare programs for the bumpkins who are from there.
Good job. Why not pick a state with some industry attached? Milk cows and wooley underwear doesn't account for heavy industry in my book.
If the Democrats really wanted to win an election, they would have picked someone who could actually run for office and win.
They didn't. Now they can, because they have seen the light. The Dean's, Kerry's, Gore's... don't count. Dean may have had half a chance, but he blew it when he blew his top on national T.V., That doesn't convey well to a large chunk of voters, it may convey to some readers on the Blog site, but in general, I doubt the voters experienced the sunshine factor after that stellar performance. Governor's usually do well in elections (at least the last 30 or so years have proven that). So why not pick a Governor? They did, Dean. From a state with little or no industry, energy, whatever... governing Vermont is not a signficant test bed. It's a bedroom state. A getaway state. Pick one from an industrial/agracultural state, and one with some complexity, and population, and good political experience. Who would that be? Virginia? Warner? Ugh. Never mind.
Which one? Come on people. Give 'em a hand.
19 - steve
Long live the G>O>P!!!!!!!
20 - imelda
Phil: "I think some people have more respect for our nation now that our president isn't fucking the help"
Actually, no. Now your president is fucking [over] everybody, and there is not much respect left for your nation.
How can you equate a little white lie about adultery to a huge whopper that got you into a pointless war where your young men are getting killed and maimed? What sort of a ludicrous "moral" stance is that?
21 - joey
I agree, those troops should be on the mexican border right now, protecting our soverenty, going house to house and finding the millions of illegal undocumented workers and escorting them back to their countries of origin. Those troops should be heading for Rita strike zones to pick up the trash and help those who could not or would not help themselves. Those troops should be manning checkpoints along interstates, and other transportation hubs. Running dogs around parking lots at malls and theme parks. Protecting bridges and rail way lines, shipping channels and other important infrastructure. Why would we extend our lines out to Iraq and other countries. It would easier and cheaper to exercise soveriegn rights and just kick all the people who are here under dubious circumstances out of the country and deny (by vigilance) re-entry. If found a second time, firing squad. That would send a clear concise message of "we're done screwing around"
Hard line... better than a bully line or childlike behavior. I agree Imelda, there is work to be done. We lost focus, we need to regain or perspective and get rid of the parasites which are dragging this country down and creating a threat (real or perceived). We should cut off foreign aid to countries that do not follow our guidlines for MFN status, we should ban imports from countries that trade with terrorist states and we should quite sharing our technology and surplus to anyone, in fear that it could conceivably be used against us. That is the more rational approach to maintaining our way of life in this increasingly violent and unstable world. Globalization is a failure. Let us turn within and protect ourselves. We have the infrastructure, we have the technology and we have the energy to do it. Let's do it!
22 - phil
Imelda...I find it interesting that a president who screws his help is only telling little white lies...putting the country through months of crap while he bombs aspirin factories( otherwise I am sure you would be screaming sexual harrasment in the work place and the poor sap would have been booted out of his job) and one who deals with a real global terrorist threat by striking the heart of the terror network is fighting a "point less" war...where were you on 9-11 anyway..the moon...what did clinton do to stop ben ladin...he had him and let him go...??? Is your memory that bad? Is your ability to be reasonable worse??
23 - Dave Nalle
I'm with Al. Yes, the Republicans have sucked in many ways, but we're really in a situation where we might just be better off with more sucky, do nothing occasionally amusing buffoonery in office than the alternative. The Republicans are vile but incompetent. The Democrats are just as vile, but there's at least the outside possibility they might be competent, and that would be as hell of a lot worse. Imagine people like Conyers, Durbin, Rangel and Pelosi actually running things. We might as well just burn the constitution, bar our doors and start learning Cantonese.
Dave
24 - Eric Berlin
Phil -- People in other countries could care less that the President had an affair with an intern. Their curiocity is certainly piqued by the sex-hating, sex-obsessed American culture.
"The Duke" (as compared to The Duke) -- You seem quite scornful toward the fact that people live in a state called Vermont and make a living and a life there and have a state government in which there are state-wide programs, etc.
25 - Nancy
Clinton's amorality was centered on his dick, & in the long run, matters only to himself & Hillary; Bush's amorality is a quantum leap wider, deeper, and far more disturbing. Smirk has brought the US & the presidency to a new low I think even Buchanan won't be able to match.