[lit-ideas] Re: Bush's domestic tsunami and a question
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 15:05:32 -0800
Eric,
This isn't the best climate to discuss your concerns. Mike doesn't attack
Ahmadinejad, only Bush. He doesn't attack what the Pasdaran are doing, only
our military, etc., etc.; which is to say that even though he makes a number
of Islamist arguments, he probably isn't one; which means he probably isn't
interested in a reasonable discussion or argument.
I suspect we agree that Bush's Foreign Policy has been a good one. The more
I read, the more reasons I find for that view. So in terms of Foreign
Policy Bush is the wise and courageous leader. I realize some people will
prefer Ahmadinejad and Rafsanjani to Bush, but perhaps they won't read this.
I don't think we can utterly set Domestic Policy aside in viewing Bush's
Foreign Policy. If the economy weren't kept strong, he would be hampered to
some extent in his Foreign Policy. When you call him "high-spending," do
you remove the military portion to look at the other expenditures? If we
weren't at war, would Bush still be a "high-spending Calvin Coolidge"? I
haven't been following the domestic side of the Bush policy to any
significant extent, but that's not my impression.
As to the tax shelters that help the rich, as obnoxious as that seems, there
is truth to the trickle-down business. We have seen lots of trickle-down in
the U.S., and lots of emphasis upon entitlements in such places as France,
and the trickle-down man in the street may be doing better than the
Frenchman with entitlements France doesn't seem able to afford. Our economy
was in better shape than any other major economy the last time I checked.
Maybe he isn't doing much leading in the domestic realm, but if out economy
is better than any other, maybe he ought to leave it alone.
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Eric
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 2:33 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Bush's domestic tsunami and a question
Mike: Mistake? You can't use the word "mistake"
in reference to the Bush Foreign Policy -- that's
like calling the Indonesian tsunami a high tide.
Bush's biggest mistakes have always been domestic
policy mistakes. Outside the country, he can fly
by the seat of his pants, innovate, experiment,
fine-tune, provoke, intimidate, infuriate,
advance, retract, and take the big gamble.
At home, he is a high-spending Calvin Coolidge who
does nothing to stop corporate tax shelters, and
allows his party and important domestic agencies
to be pirated by hacks who would make Ulysses
Grant blush. Out of fear of "the Japan scenario,"
he allows state governments to float in red ink.
So padlocked into the confines of his Reagan-era
ideology, he has no vision of domestic leadership.
He gets pulled into energy conservation by Wall
Street and into environmental restraint by his
Fundamentalist constituents. He has no compass, no
oar, and no rudder.
So--if anyone has read this far--a different
question, one between presidents' personal
leadership skills and their political ideologies.
_______
Imagine there's an election. One candidate
espouses your fondest hopes, values, and political
aspirations; yet he (or she) has no imagination or
leadership ability, no managerial skill and no guts.
The other candidate proclaims an ideology you
despise; yet she (or he) is brainy and tough,
knows how to manage complex groups, is courageous
and inspiring, albeit for the wrong reasons.
So who's your choice? Do you pick bad government
based on an ideological point of view you
support? Or good government in service of an
ideology you loathe? Don't rush to answer. Can a
bad leader with the right ideals do more damage
than a good leader with the wrong ideals?
Not that we have such a choice. But the problem
interests me.
Eric
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
