Five Things I Hate About President Bush
Don't let the title throw you. I'm not about to go into a Chimpy Bushitler Krugmanesque diatribe against the president. Indeed, I think the president has done many wonderful things. First, the Bush tax cuts invigorated the economy. Second, his response to 9/11 was decisive. Third, he at least brought the idea of social security reform to the table.

There are also many results stemming from administration policies that are too early to know. We do not, for example, really know what the result of the Medicare prescription drug benefit. Pundits have said it will be both hugely expensive and that it's too complicated for the average person to use. We'll find out which is true, but it won't be for a few years.

There are also some things that Bush has been wrongfully blamed for, chiefly hurricane Katrina. A natural disaster is simply not the chief executive's fault. Sure, we can find fault with the response, but when has that not happened. In spite of all these caveats, there are plenty of things to hate about the President.

First, President Bush is extremely loyal to his inner circle of advisers. This would normally be a good quality, but Bush has occasionally allowed this loyalty to get in the way of the best interest of the country. The prime examples of this are the nominations of Bernard Kerik to DHS and Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. As I've written here before, Kerik is a boob and he should have never gotten the nod. Harriet Miers, while certainly not a boob (and who is reportedly a wonderful lady and talented lawyer) was in no way shape or form ready for the Supreme Court. Similarly, Bush has shown an unhealthy loyalty to Donald Rumsfeld.

Second, the President is a spendthrift. Republicans are supposed to exhibit fiscal restraint. While I do not believe that the federal deficit is an unmanageable problem, there can be no free ride. While deficit spending was justified in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the economy is booming now. There is no fiscal policy justification for deficit spending now. What this country needs is some expenditure cuts. This is not entirely the President's fault. Republicans have unfortunately become just like Democrats--distributing pork to insure their own reelection efforts. But the President has never seen a spending bill he didn't like. That has got to change.

Third, the administration has not been educating the American people about Iraq. Yesterday's speech aside, the administration has not been forthright about the situation there. I support the war. It was and still is the the right thing to do. Indeed, the democratization of Iraq is the probably the only real hope for long-term peace in the Middle East. What we have gotten from the President is platitudes optimism, but little else. Mr. President, the American people are willing to sacrifice for a greater good, but it must be explained to them. Do not underestimate them. You have not done enough to convince them this cause is worth it.

Forth, more broadly, the administration has not educated the American people about the global war on terror. There is a spillover effect from Iraq that effects the global war on terror. The administration has never explained to the American people the long-term sacrifices and strategy in the GWOT. It is not like other wars. It is rather an multigenerational struggle for the future of humanity. Will liberal democracy flourish or will it be replaced by tyrannical theocrats? This is not an idle question. The strategies in this war have to concern what the world will be like thirty years from now, not what it will be like next week.

Fifth, the administration has not been responsive to attacks on these doctrines. While the previous four faults have been about the president's policies and personality, this final fault is with their tactics. The administration has failed to get ahead of the curve on major issues. They do a great job when they get the ball rolling, but they have not shown the flexibility to fire back at every broadside in an individual news cycle. Examples abound: the Katrina aftermath, the Cheney hunting accident, the NSA leak case. None of these things hurt the White House in the long term, but getting out in front of the story early on would have made a world of difference in American's belief in the credibility of the White House.

Congressional Republicans should note that any or all of these things could change going forward. I think the president needs to bring in some new blood to the White House.
- posted by Base10 @ 8:18 AM