George Bush, the Manchurian candidate

Business Online ^ | October 09, 2005

[AntiGuv]

That's a good point, and I would say that they probably have in mind the Eastern establishment country-club Republicans that opposed Reagan. They don't outright say so, obviously, but I'm extrapolating from the overall premise that Bush is wrecking the Reagan revolution. Of course, I may just be reading my own preconceptions into the text.

[Torie]

Using the term tabula rasa is a bit hyperbolic. Roberts has been a foot soldier from day one. But being a great justice is not co-extensive with carrying out the "conservative" agenda on the court, some of which I disagree with. I like a sweeping commerce clause, and strong federal power for example, and don't think the establishment clause should be gutted down to a mere probibition of establishing Episcopaleanism as the national church. What one "conservative" wants, is not what another wants, or thinks is a reasoned and intelligent view of Constitutional jurisprudence or respect or lack thereof for precedent. In fact, I don't want a reckless disregard for precedent ala Thomas. Overturning precedent should require rather compelling reasons.

[Torie]

Eastern establishment country-club Republicans that opposed Reagan

Are there any of those left, and are "they" really sending memos to Bush dictating his actions? Is Christy Whitman really the woman behind the Bush curtain?

[counterpunch]

Mr Bush has made the mediocre John Roberts, a moderate conservative with an undistinguished legal track record, the new Chief Justice

But President Bush exemplifies excellence in mediocrity!
I think John Roberts was an inspired choice, personally.
As was Harriet Miers... but inspired by what, exactly, one should ask.

[mdefranc]

W. has allowed non-security-related federal spending to grow faster that has any President since Lyndon Baines Johnson. There is no way to excuse it.

[AntiGuv]

Hmm.. Come to think of it, I probably was just reading my own preconceptions into the text, because their closing paragraph contrasts social conservatives (e.g., the Bush team) with economic libertarians (e.g., the Reagan revolution). So, who knows what they have in mind! Maybe they didn't see the movie and aren't all that clear on what the phrase means, except that it's someone who betrays and destroys from the inside, having appeared to be in sync, but in reality not. =)

[cardinal4]

These would be the same Tories who have been minority to Labour since John Major?

[Torie]

Reagan spent recklessly too, as a guid pro quo to the Dems to get money for defense to snuff out the evil empire.

[msnimje]

I've said from the beginning, Roberts is in fact a tabula rasa on far too many issues. A very brilliant tabula rasa, but a tabula rasa nonetheless.

He really isn't, his history is one of consistent conservatism and unwavering commitment to the improvement of the Judiciary in this country.
The fact that he has done so quietly does not mean that he is a blank slate.

He was brilliant in law school and even started Harvard College as a sophomore.
When he graduated he was recruited by big time law firms with offers of huge salaries. He choose a meager salary and a clerkship with Judge Friendly. The following year he landed a coveted Clerkship with Justice Rehnquist.

After that did he go chase a fortune by chasing ambulances? No, he became a foot soldier in the Reagan revolution. Whenever there was a Republican administration, he worked in it. When there was a Democratic Administration, he was in private practice. He is a memeber of the Supreme Court Historical Society and gives speeches about the court on a regular basis.

If you look at his resume not as a list of what he DID do but rather what he DID NOT, you see the measure of the man.

[Ben Mugged]

I'm concerned that too many are becoming entrenched with this "wrong choice" cause. The Dims are now talking about taking back the Senate because the Republican party is divided. If Republicans continue to beat GW with this issue, we just might help them be successful. There are two more potential SCOTUS nominees in GW's future.

[Sabramerican]

The hint is to be found in calling Rove the eminence grise.

Implication is that Bush is the "Manchurian candidate" of mainstream, read multinational big business, rather then as he portrays himself, a Conservative in the Reagan mold.

[Torie]

Reagan was a social conservative too, just not with a born again Christian cadence, and both Bush and Reagan believe in free markets, and both liked to spend money to soften its slings and arrows, and grease the skids. This Reagan versus Bush thing as an ideological matter really collapses after the most superficial of analyses. And oh yes, both will be viewed as having had a more successful first term than second. That seems to be almost a law of physics when it comes to presidents.

[Torie]

Rove = multinationals = controlling Bush = Manchurean. Whatever. To me the term multinationals as an expletive is used in the trade context. If you are a free trader, you are a multinational sock puppet. Reagan and Bush were both free traders (except for Bush's pandering steel tariff ploy to try to win Pennsylvania), so they BOTH must be multinational symps.

[TheDon]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1498597/posts?page=80#80

[nerdgirl]

good one!

[carl in alaska]

"W. has allowed non-security-related federal spending to grow faster that has any President since Lyndon Baines Johnson. There is no way to excuse it."

Be careful what you say here and who you blame it on. Much of the growth in federal spending is for medicare and social security and this spending is accelerating because of the aging of the US population, not because of anything Bush did. These are programs mandated by the US congress and established in the 80's and 90's, way before Bush took office. Any reductions in spending on these programs for seniors are met with vicious, distorted attacks by democrat politicians who would accuse Bush of trying to "balance the budget on the backs of the elderly."

Education spending probably had to be increased because our eductional system needed an overhaul and more teachers working in some areas. While this should and could be funded by cutting state and local administrative costs, at a practical level it's very tough to overhaul state and local educational systems in a reasonable time. Then while you're waiting and fighting to overhaul state agencies, more kids are failing in school. So the better alternative in this case was probably to spend more at the federal level.

Once we can begin significant troop withdrawals from Iraq, the budget deficit will start shrinking. The technology industry is starting to rebound now after major over-investment in tech and telecomm equipment back in 2000-2001. The Bell operating companies are starting to invest again and all kinds of new wireless PC and PDA-type products are on their way to the market. We are likely to be in a major economic boom by 2008 with gasoline around $2.50 per gallon. Hillary will then be wiped out in a GOP landslide that wins 43 states AND American Samoa.

[M. Dodge Thomas]

I'm pretty much in your camp on most of the issues you list, and I suspect that a string of "social-conserative" SC rulings is about to start a process of gradually splitting off large numbers of "independent" and "moderate" voters (and especially women) from the Republican party in much the same way that the "civil rights" decisions of the 50s ad 60s eventually separated southern "Regan Republicans" from the Democrats.

[msnimje]

But this isn't third grade recess, calling good people 'Bushbots' is childish...

What about the people who proudly declare they are "Bushbots?" For them, being called one is a compliment.

[Big Horn]

I expect Harriet to get on the court and then proceed to kick the crap out of liberal elitists. She and Roberts will refuse to create special rights to gay marraige and abortion at any time for any female at any age. These special rights do not exist in our constitution and these two will refuse to amend our contstitution by judical decree.

You nailed it. I think many people will be surprised. Never underestimate Pres. Bush

[muawiyah]

"W" is going to have 3 more chances to nominate members of the Supreme Court. Even the Brits should have realized that.