Let Bush Be Bush: "Mr. Bush is Mr. Reagan's Heir"

American Enterprise Institute ^ | 12/17/03 | Michael A. Ledeen

[bdeaner]

Let Bush Be Bush

By Michael A. Ledeen

Posted: Wednesday, December 17, 2003

ARTICLES

New York Sun  

Publication Date: December 17, 2003

As the Reagan years pass further back into time, both his enemies and his admirers are straining mightily to write the history the way they want it to have happened. In the process, those eight years are taking on almost mythical characteristics. The 'phobes see an ideologically driven administration almost psychotically obsessed with defeating communism; the 'philes see a simpatico human being who understood America perfectly and used American strengths to bring down the Soviet empire.

It wasn't like that. Actually, in many ways it was very much like today. As President Reagan headed into the fourth year of his first term, there was a fierce battle within the administration, within the Republican Party, and within the conservative movement that the combatants all saw as an epic struggle for the heart and soul of the president himself.

On the one hand, the hawks, headed by Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, Director of Central Intelligence William Casey, and National Security Adviser William Clark, argued that the president should focus his re-election campaign on the guerrilla war in Central America, and the real danger that the Soviet empire could solidify a land base in the Western Hemisphere for the first time.

On the other hand, Mr. Reagan's political advisers, from James Baker to Michael Deaver to Nancy Reagan, and, at least in part, Secretary of State George Shultz, wanted to keep issues of war and peace secondary, and certainly didn't want any new geopolitical initiatives before the election. The economy was improving, there was already a lot on the president's plate, and they didn't want any unpleasant surprises or, worse still, any setbacks. They wanted to run on the uplifting theme of "Springtime in America."

The hawks feared that such a campaign would paralyze foreign policy for a year or more and give the Soviets and their many proxies the chance to challenge us, both on the ground in Central America and in the ongoing debate over the "Euro missiles" in NATO. And so the hawks launched their own slogan: "Let Reagan Be Reagan."

The implication was clear: Left to his own instincts, the president would pursue an aggressive foreign policy regardless of the political calculus. The fear was also clear: If he listened too carefully to the politicos, he might gut our foreign policy and incur terrible costs in his second term. The battle was intense, inconclusive, and unending.

One of the most poignant and instructive moments in the congressional hearings into Iran-Contra came when somebody asked Mr. Shultz why he hadn't killed off an NSC initiative, and he answered, in essence: "I thought I had, but in this government nothing is ever really over. The debates keep coming back over and over again."

That's the way democracies work, to the consternation of those who prefer clear definition and final decisions, and that's exactly the way this administration is working. If you listen to today's hawks, you can well imagine them saying "Let Bush Be Bush." They believe that left to his own instincts, the president would be much more aggressive than Secretary of State Powell has been. They think he would move more quickly against the terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere in the region, give greater support to democratic movements throughout the Middle East, and keep our enemies on the defensive.

On the other hand, the more moderate presidential advisers and, in all likelihood, the politicos, think they've got a pat hand: The economy is improving, Iraq is coming along, the president's image is improving here and abroad, and we've got plenty on our plate for the moment. So let's run an upbeat campaign on American resilience and glory, get a working majority in both houses, and then we'll see.

The "Let Reagan be Reagan" effort largely failed, "Springtime in America" produced a landslide, the situation in Central America became hotter and hotter, the Soviets were indeed aggressive on the Euro missiles, and the hawks were greatly discouraged.

As we know, things did come around for the hawks. We won the Euro missile debate (thanks to the Italians, then as now, willing to be extremely brave when serious Western interests were on the line, even though, then as now, the Germans were inclined to hide behind shortsighted peace slogans), we eventually prevailed in Central America, and, shortly after Mr. Reagan's second term, the Soviet empire collapsed.

The point is that there was no ideological juggernaut. There was, as there always is, an ongoing struggle for the president's heart and soul. And at a moment comparable to this one, the hawks feared they were losing Mr. Reagan.

The "Let Bush Be Bush" effort is also likely doomed to failure, for electoral politics invariably trumps geopolitics, unless there is a clearly perceived crisis. At least for the moment, the president is going to try to deal with the problems we already have and is not going to expand the terror war. Events could force him to change strategy, but I think that's the only way it will happen before November 2004.

In this, as in many other ways, Mr. Bush is Mr. Reagan's heir. And he is carrying on the tradition of the real Mr. Reagan, not the caricature we are getting from some of Mr. Reagan's most passionate lovers and haters.

Michael A. Ledeen holds the Freedom Chair at AEI.

[Ancesthntr]

I cannot imagine Ronaldus Maximus, prior to the onset of Alzheimer's, signing the CFR or the Medicare bills. I also cannot imagine his administration supporting the AWB, especially if the gunnies had put him over the top in 3 traditionally Democratic states.

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

Bush's policies will create the largest economic boom in history!

[thoughtomator]

Bush is not the heir of Reagan. He is the heir of FDR.

[Southack]

Presidency of George W. Bush -- the first 35 months

 

Banned Partial Birth Abortion

Reversed Clinton's move to strike Reagan's anti-abortion Mexico Policy

Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty

Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court

Killed Clinton's CO2 rules that were choking off all of the electricity surplus to California.

Killed Clinton's "ergonomic" rules that OSHA was about to implement; rules that would have shut down every home business in America.

Killed the U.S. - CCCP ABM Treaty that was preventing the U.S. from deploying our ABM defenses

Has CONSTRUCTION in process on the first ten ABM silos in Alaska so that America has a defense against North Korean nukes

 

Pushed through THREE raises for our military.

Increased Defense Dept funding which had deteriorated during the previous 8 years

 

Stopped foreign aid that would be used to fund abortions.

Supported and upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals

Signed E.O. reversing Clinton's policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act

Signed TWO bills into law that arm our pilots with handguns in the cockpit

Currently pushing for full immunity from lawsuits for our national gun manufacturers

Ordered Attorney-General Ashcroft to formally notify the Supreme Court that the OFFICIAL U.S. government position on the 2nd Amendment is that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, NOT a leftist-imagined *collective* right

Told the United Nations we weren't interested in their plans for gun control (i.e. the International Ban on Small Arms Trafficking Treaty)

Successfully executed 2 wars: Afghanistan and Iraq. 50 million people who had lived under tyrannical regimes now live in freedom

 

Executed a WAR ON TERROR by getting world-wide cooperation to track funds/terrorists (has cut off much of the terrorist's funding and captured or killed many key leaders of the al Qaeda network)

 

Brought back our EP-3 intel plane and crew from China without any bribes or bloodshed

Started withdrawing our troops from Bosnia and has announced withdrawal of our troops from Germany and the Korean DMZ.

Signed the LARGEST nuclear arms reduction in world history with Russia

Initiated comprehensive review of our military, which was completed just prior to 9/11/01, accurately reported that ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE was critical.

Changed the tone in the White House, restoring HONOR and DIGNITY to the Presidency

Reorganized bureaucracy...after 9/11, condensed 20+ overlapping agencies and their intelligence sectors into one agency: the Department of Homeland Security.

Initiated discussion on privatizing Social Security and individual investment accounts.

Improving govt. efficiency with .8 million jobs put up for bid...weakening unions and cutting undeserved pay raises. Wants merit based promotions/raises only.

Orchestrated Republican control of the White House, the House AND the Senate.

Killed the liberal ABA's role in vetting federal judges for Congress.

GWB signed an executive order enforcing the Supreme Court's Beck decision (re: union dues being used for political campaigns against individual's wishes)

Turned around an inherited economy that was in recession.

Passed tough new laws to hold corporate criminals to account as a result of corporate scandals.

Signed 2 income tax cuts ---- 1 of which was the largest Dollar value tax cut in world history

Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains

In process of eliminating IRS marriage penalty.

Increased small business incentives to expand and to hire new people

Signed into law the No Child Left Behind legislation delivering the most dramatic education reforms in a generation (challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations)

Reorganized the INS in an attempt to safeguard the borders and ports of America and to eliminate bureaucratic redundancies and lack of accountability.

Signed trade promotion authority

Committed US funds to purchase medicine for millions of men and women and children now suffering with AIDS in Africa

Passed Medicare Reform (authorized $39.5 Billion per year for preventive medicine such as drugs and doctor visits as well as included a ten year Privatization option)

Urging federal liability reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits

Supports class action reform bill which limits lawyer fees so that more settlement money goes to victims

Submitted comprehensive Energy Plan--awaits Congressional action (works to develop cleaner technology, produce more natural gas here at home, make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy, improve national grid, etc.)

Endorses and promotes The Responsibility Era ("In a compassionate society, people respect one another and take responsibility for the decisions they make in life. My hope is to change the culture from one that has said, if it feels good, do it; if you've got a problem, blame somebody else -- to one in which every single American understands that he or she are responsible for the decisions that you make; you're responsible for loving your children with all your heart and all your soul; you're responsible for being involved with the quality of the education of your children; you're responsible for making sure the community in which you live is safe; you're responsible for loving your neighbor, just like you would like to be loved yourself. " -----this quote was too good to leave out)

Started the USA Freedom Corps

Initiated review of all federal agencies with a goal to eliminate federal jobs (completed September 2003) in an effort to reduce the size of federal gov while increasing private sector jobs.

Part of coalition (Russia, Israel, EU, Palestine, USA) for Israeli/Palestinian "Roadmap to Peace"

Challenged the United Nations to live up to their responsibilities and not become The League of Nations ( in other words, completely irrelevant)

Nominated strong, conservative judges to the judiciary.

Changed parts of the Forestry Management Act to allow necessary clean-up of the national forests in order to reduce fire danger.

As part of the national forests clean-up, the President restricted judicial challenges (based on the Endangered Species Act and other challenges) and removed the need for an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) before removing fuels/logging to reduce fire danger.

Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops.

President Bush signed the workplace verification bill to prevent hiring of illegal Aliens
S. 1685, the Basic Pilot Extension Act of 2003, was signed by President Bush on December 3, 2003.
It extends for five years the workplace employment eligibility authorization pilot programs created in 1996. It expands the pilot programs from the original five states to all 50 states.

[Rodney King]

Great list, I'd been getting down on him lately.

[Southack]

"Bush is not the heir of Reagan."

Bush is more Reagan than Reagan.

President Reagan didn't ban Partial Birth Abortion. Bush did.

President Reagan didn't kill the U.S. - CCCP ABM Treaty. Bush did.

President Reagan was great. Bush will be better.

[cars for sale]

ditto but add this Reagan did not have a GW to learn from but GW did have a Ronald Reagon to study

[jpl]

I am as big a Reagan-phile as anyone here, but another thing they have in common (and that we conservatives like to forget) is that federal spending skyrocketed at an incredible rate on Reagan's watch just like it is now. It will come to be viewed as the one negative mark on the historical record for both of them.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Mr. Bush is Mr. Reagan's heir. And he is carrying on the tradition of the real Mr. Reagan, not the caricature we are getting from some of Mr. Reagan's most passionate lovers and haters.

Hint, hint, all you fair weather, maybe-I'll-support-Bush-and-maybe-I-won't RINOs.

Southack: your list is, as always, irrefutable. :)

[Samwise]

Thank you. I'm bookmarking your post.

[bdeaner]

Bush is not the heir of Reagan. He is the heir of FDR.

You either have a very misguided understanding of history, a misunderstanding of current events, or both.

[proud American in Canada]

Thanks for #5!

Excellent post.

[billbears]

-Started the USA Freedom Corps
-Signed into law the No Child Left Behind legislation delivering the most dramatic education reforms in a generation (challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations)
-Committed US funds to purchase medicine for millions of men and women and children now suffering with AIDS in Africa

You know just because you post these actions in bold, larger font, and different colors on every thread that dares question the President doesn't make any of the actions listed anything more than big government and a waste of taxpayer dollars

[Capt. Jake]

Can't concede that Bush is more Reagan than Reagan, but will add another item to the list:

Bush marginalized the ABA's importance in the judicial selection process.

[Southack]

"You Bushbots [newbies] really have gone nuts."

There, I fixed your comment for you. What part of banning Partial Birth Abortion and killing the U.S. - CCCP ABM nuclear defense prohibitions were you having difficulty with, by the way?

[gramho12]

If you look at President Reagan's first years, there are several bills he signed that would not meet the conservative standard. He was a pragmatist when he had to be - it is just that we tend to forget the first years. We did not have the total news coverage and political "junkery" back then as we do now. Doa search, take a look at some of the legislative actions taken during his first year and you may by surprised.

[San Jacinto]

Super work listing those accomplishments, Southack!

And Bush has gone on record just this week stating that he would support a Constitutional Amendment in defense of marriage.

Also, he sticks to the task where judicial appointments are concerned. He will not back down, and he will ultimately prevail. This is a vey important issue.

[Southack]

"You know just because you post these actions in bold, larger font, and different colors on every thread that dares question the President doesn't make any of the actions listed anything more than big government and a waste of taxpayer dollars."

Banning Partial Birth Abortion was a big government "waste of taxpayer dollars" to you?!

Killing the U.S. - CCCP ABM nuclear defense prohibitions were a waste of taxpayer monies to you?!

Killing the Kyoto Global Warming treaty was a waste of funds to you?!

Arming pilots was a waste of tax money to you?!

Rolling back CO2 red tape regulations was a waste of taxes to you?!

Easing the rules for Genetically Modified food is a waste, to you?!

Building logging roads as firebreaks, without having to fill out bureaucratic "Environmental Impact Statements" is a waste of taxes to you?!

Do we even live on the same planet?!

[Cicero]

I cannot imagine Ronaldus Maximus, prior to the onset of Alzheimer's, signing the CFR or the Medicare bills.

Reagan held the line on spending for his first few months in office, and then he pretty much gave up. In the end, he signed spending bills that increased the deficit by about a trillion and a half.

I don't fault him for it. He did what he could. And I believe Bush is doing what he can. There's no point in ideological purity if you can't win an election or get it through congress.

As another response above has indicated, Bush has done plenty. He is far more conservative than his father. He has been sound on all the basic issues except spending, and I think if he had pushed harder on that he probably wouldn't have achieved anything else at all, because congress would have revolted.

[CWOJackson]

Great points.

[Southack]

President Bush also ordered Attorney-General Ashcroft to formally notify the Supreme Court that the OFFICIAL U.S. government position on the 2nd Amendment is that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, NOT a leftist-imagined *collective* right.

In contrast, Reagan held the official government position to be a collective right in line with President Carter before him.

Reagan was great, but nowhere near as radical Right as Bush.

[ohioWfan]

I would be highly suspicious of someone who signed up December 7, 2003, and who called you a 'Bushbot' in his first post to you.

Most likely a retread who has been banned, and is assuming a new identity.

And, Veracruz......don't take the name of my Savior, and Lord in vain..........please.

[gramho12]

Item 3: Rating Judicial Nominees From Newsmax: You will recall back when the Democrats were in charge of the executive and legislative branches of government, they had the American Bar Association involved in the selection of judicial nominees. Many of us had insisted that the ABA should have no special role in picking judges, and indeed, President Bush 43 removed the ABA from this position, something that his father and Ronald Reagan had declined to do.

From a Bruce Bartlett article: Reagan may have resisted calls for tax increases, but he ultimately supported them. In 1982 alone, he signed into law not one but two major tax increases. The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act raised taxes by $37.5 billion per year, and the Highway Revenue Act of 1982 raised the gasoline tax by another $3.3 billion.

According to a recent Treasury Department study, TEFRA alone raised taxes by almost 1 percent of the gross domestic product, making it the largest peacetime tax increase in American history. An increase of similar magnitude today would raise more than $100 billion per year.

In 1983, Reagan signed legislation raising the Social Security tax rate. This is a tax increase that lives with us still, since it initiated automatic increases in the taxable wage base. As a consequence, those with moderately high earnings see their payroll taxes rise every single year.

The following year, Reagan signed another big tax increase in the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984. This raised taxes by $18 billion per year or 0.4 percent of GDP. A similar sized tax increase today would be about $44 billion.

The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 raised taxes yet again. Even the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which was designed to be revenue-neutral, contained a net tax increase in its first two years. And the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 raised taxes still more.

The year 1988 appears to be the only year of the Reagan presidency, other than the first, in which taxes were not raised legislatively. Of course, previous tax increases remained in effect. According to a table in the 1990 budget, the net effect of all these tax increases was to raise taxes by $164 billion in 1992, or 2.6 percent of GDP. This is equivalent to almost $300 billion in today's economy.

Reagan was a great President, and a great man, but he was not totally Mr. Conservative.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

-- Banned Partial Birth Abortion

-- Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty

-- Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court

-- Signed 2 income tax cuts ---- 1 of which was the largest Dollar value tax cut in world history

-- Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains

-- In process of eliminating IRS marriage penalty.

Here on the planet Earth -- as opposed to the Bizarro-World -- these are all commonly accepted as bedrock, essential conservative principles; and their passage and enactment, conservative victories.

... and: they all happened on GWB's watch... and nobody else's.

Period. End of sentence. End of paragraph. Full stop.

Ronald Reagan knew there was a great deal more to "conservatism" than simply the size of the government's purse.

Right smart fellah, that Reagan. :)

[q_an_a]

now that is a good post. good for you and thanks for a list that I'll bookmark and pass along to others. high five, jolly good and more!!

[Southack]

"I'm having difficulty with you saying that Bush is a better President than Reagan. It's absurd and shows that you've been drinking far too much Kool-Aid."

What I said was that Bush was more conservative than Reagan in several ways, not better (at least not quite yet).

See Post #31, for instance.

Likewise, President Reagan didn't ban Partial Birth Abortion. Bush did.

President Reagan didn't kill the U.S. - CCCP ABM Treaty. Bush did.

President Reagan was great. Bush will be better."

And what is shows, contrary to your claims above, is not that I've had too much Kool Aid, but rather that I'm willing to compare facts rather than legends and myths.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

(Joined the Constitution Party on 12/9/03 and it feels soooo goooood.)

Ah. Not a conservative, then.

That explains it.

[Texas Federalist]

"Reagan was great, but nowhere near as radical Right as Bush."

You're on crack.

[Southack]

Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty
Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court
"No, the Senate did when it refused to ratify either treaty--before Bush even became President."

You are rather gullible and naive, aren't you!

President Clinton enacted the Kyoto Treaty through his Executive Orders, requiring all government agencies to behave *as if* it had been ratified by our Senate, even though it hadn't.

President Bush killed Kyoto by reversing those Executive Orders of Clinton.

Not that some 3rd Party neophyte from the absurdly named "Constitution" Party would know or even be capable of mentally comprehending such realpolitiks, though.

[Pagey]

Thank you, I needed (and saved) that list and shall commit that to memory.Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill (who preserved the New Deal and the Great Society and even admitted that "I've been one of the big spenders of all time," but I digress)and the democrats controlled the house, how was R.R. supposed to control spending? GWB simply stole the democrats thunder by giving more away than they could ever have imagined. While I may not be entirely happy about it, at least he stole their issue, one-upped them and I can laugh at and watch their party slowly spiral into the ground.

[Texas Federalist]

"(Joined the Constitution Party on 12/9/03 and it feels soooo goooood.)
Ah. Not a conservative, then."

Kent, meet Southack. Southack . . . Kent. You both may have met before in the happy little fantasy land you both inhabit on lollipop lane where enacting a $7 trillion Medicare entitlement, extending child credit tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes, supporting the assault weapons ban, and increasing the size of the federal government by 25% in 4 years is "conservative".

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

You both may have met before in the happy little fantasy land you both inhabit on lollipop lane yapyapyap blahblahblah.

Go back and (re-)read posting #32, please.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

[billbears]

-Banned Partial Birth Abortion

He did that all by his lonesome did he? Mind you the PBA doesn't do anything but it makes for good press eh? As for the others I consider to those to be of less importance than unconstitutional massive spending packages my eventual grandchildren will be paying. But you keep calling Bush conservative. And black is white. Red is green. And pigs can fly.

[Southack]

Likewise, President Reagan didn't ban Partial Birth Abortion. Bush did.

"Your point being? How does that have anything to do with how conservative Bush is in relation to Reagan?"

Nothing is more conservative than being and acting pro-life. Bush banned Partial Birth Abortion. Reagan didn't. That makes President Bush's presidency more conservative than Reagan's, and that's what it has to do in relation to Reagan vs Bush.

President Reagan didn't kill the U.S. - CCCP ABM Treaty.

"Because he couldn't. What's wrong with you?"

What's "wrong" with me is that I've actually *read* the literal text of the U.S. - CCCP ABM Treaty, and that treaty had a clause in it allowing either the U.S. or the CCCP to withdraw from the ABM treaty by giving the other party 6 months notice.

So President Bush gave the Ruskies six months notice and now we are out of it.

Reagan was great, but he never had the courage to give Gorbachev those six months notice of our intent to withdraw from that treaty.

And your bizarre claim that Reagan somehow "couldn't" do what Bush just did just goes to show that you know nothing.

[Texas Federalist]

Reagan's party never controlled both houses of Congress. Bush has no excuse.

[Trust but Verify]

Love your tagline.

Does the Constitution Party have a political forum like FR?

If so, why aren't you there instead of here?

If not, why don't you start one and take some of these other whiners with you?

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

He did that all by his lonesome did he?

He's the one who ramrodded it through, yes. And real conservatives rate Protection of the Unborn fairly highly on their lists of "to-do" things, quyite frankly.

Real conservatives know that. Without having to be told on a public message board forum, I mean.

Mind you the PBA doesn't do anything but it makes for good press eh?

Put down the crack pipe, and back away slowly. It's currently be fought for at the judicial level, even as we speak... and NOT by any of the sunshine lollipop "conservatives" of the "Constitution Party," either, I might add. (It takes real conservatives to get down and fight in the trenches, rather than sniveling and bellyaching, you see.)

As for the others I consider to those to be of less importance than unconstitutional massive spending packages my eventual grandchildren will be paying

Your gross misunderstanding of the full ramifications (and realities) of conservative theory and practice has been rendered well and truly transparent by this point, yes, I agree.

But you keep calling Bush conservative. And black is white. Red is green. And pigs can fly.

Don't fret. The only other party with a prayer in hell of winning in '04 is running a real, actual, no foolin' former abortionist, who wants to raise taxes again to Clinton-era levels. You'll like that a good deal better, I shouldn't wonder.

[Southack]

"where enacting a $7 trillion Medicare entitlement"

Here's the telltale trait of propaganda and propagandists: they won't use real numbers.

In this case, the Medicare Reform Law of 2003 authorizes $39.5 Billion per year flat rate for each of ten years. Any other spending would have to have other, *additional* legislation passed.

In the meantime, no fewer than 6 Privatization options were legalized for Medicare in this law.

Opponents, however, have to fabricate numbers in order to try to scare people away from Privatizing Medicare. These agitators throw out multi-Trillion dollar numbers even though such spending hasn't been legally authorized, and even though such "extrapolations" (to be kind) don't take into account the Privatization of Medicare in the next ten years to any sensible degree.

So here's an easy mental test to determine if *you* have been duped into being such an agitator: simply ask yourself if you can convince people that it is a bad law based upon the legally authorized $10 per American per month actual figure (i.e. $39.5 Billion per year).

If you can't, then you are a propagandist. If you can, then you are sincere.

Should I hold my breath?