The past two months have been difficult for the Obama administration. The White House has learned that Americans still do not trust the government. Well, maybe “learned” is too strong. I’m not sure the White House gets it. However, the conventional wisdom about the 2008 election is starting to shift. Originally, the election was the “end of conservatism.” Bush’s unpopularity created an unfair perception that the United States had moved to the left. Liberals so blinded by partisanship didn’t realize that Bush wasn’t conservative.
Most of Bush’s domestic agenda was opposed by mainstream conservatives. The National Review opposed No Child Left Behind, the Prescription Drug Bill, the creation of Department of Homeland Security, and the immigration amnesty bill. Conservatives have been appalled by the spending spree in Washington. Americans were appalled as well. The Democrats who won swing districts in 2006 ran as conservatives. They didn’t promise government health care. They promised to reduce the debt.
The growing angst in America comes from the fact that President Obama seems unconcerned about reducing our debt. Instead of tackling Medicare and Social Security the President wants to burden the nation with costly climate change and health care bills. After promising more transparency and less pork, the stimulus package the President signed is a perfect example of government waste.
Obama successful tapped into the American angst with Washington when he ran for President, but he’s been unwilling to reduce the size and scope of government. I’ve never seen so much angst with Washington. Obama had a tremendous opportunity to lead the nation toward real change, but instead he represents the problem. Obama is a more liberal version of Bush. Conservatives and independents didn’t like the first version and they’ll hate the second version.
Who can successfully represent America? The Republicans don’t have anyone that I see on the horizon. A lot can change over the next few years, but there’s a huge opportunity for a new leader to connect to Americans in a very dramatic way.
The question that remains unanswered is what can Bush be classified as? And don’t even try to throw him in the Liberal category. Spending money doesn’t make you a liberal. It’s how you spend it that counts.
You study economics and political history (I am sure there is much more), I study human behavior and multiculturalism. Both of our areas of knowledge are important. Yet, Bush had neither. You got to bring something to the table.
And I don’t blame those who voted for Bush either. I mean, I voted for Kerry. Talk about a lose lose situation!
Bush was a middle of the road centrist. He was a largely a divisive figure due to the 2000 election fiasco. The anti-war left came off the rails once the War on Terror started. I don’t think Bush is dumb. He faced a lot a president, but he wasn’t a champion of conservative ideas.