Read my lips [and ignore my actions].
By Matt Miner
I felt my blood pressure rising as I read President George W. Bush’s op-ed (subscription required) in today’s Wall Street Journal. I disagreed with very little that he said. My problem is that throughout his presidency Mr. Bush has, on various occasions, directly contradicted the words of his editorial with presidential actions. This is the reason I am frustrated with President Bush.
The good news is that the editorial was sufficiently explicit and meaty that I can tell what the President meant. The thesis of the article is that the President and the new Democratic congress must work together. President Bush will uphold his values of compassion and limited government, while working in partnership with the legislature. The President then begins to articulate his governing principles. This is where the wheels come off the bus.
“My principles are no secret,” writes Mr. Bush. “I have campaigned on them in my races for governor and in two presidential contests, and I have worked hard during my presidency to translate these principles into sound policy.” Here is the problem: the President should not need to re-articulate his principles after six years in office. We should know them by now. The trouble is, that the Bush II presidency has not been marked by policy that matched the principles President Bush campaigned on. Regardless of how hard Mr. Bush has worked, he has accomplished only two things in his presidency: the 2003 tax cuts (two big thumbs up, but a mill grinds no corn with water that’s passed) and the Iraq War (outcome: TBD).
The first principle the President writes about is his commitment to Neo-Conservatism: “I believe that when America is willing to use her influence abroad, the American people are safer and the world is more secure.” Let us allow that he has consistently followed this principle, whether one accepts its justice and truth or not.
He continues, “I believe that wealth does not come from government. It comes from the hard work of America's workers, entrepreneurs and small businesses.” This is the President who has enacted tariffs on steel and timber, hurting Americans consumers and small businesses to protect entrenched interests. Mr. Bush spends the next few paragraphs speaking at a very high level about Iraq and the benefits of his tax cuts.
Next up Mr. Bush says: “The bottom line is tax relief and spending restraint are good for the American worker, good for the American taxpayer, and good for the federal budget. Now is not the time to raise taxes on the American people.” This is a true statement. Unfortunately, Mr. Bush has used his veto pen but once during his presidency (a stem cell research bill) and never tried to impose fiscal discipline on his republican friends in Congress who, from 2000 to 2006, looked increasingly like pigs lined up at a trough in the spending bills they sent to The President’s desk; Mr. Bush signed these bills time and again. These same Republicans are not in Washington this week.
The President continues in this vein throughout the article (I may comment further on Friday). He’ll forgive me for being skeptical. Trust must be earned, and actions always speak louder than words. Even if you’re true to your word more than you’re false to that word, people will remember the disappointments. This is true in business, friendship, marriage and politics.
Yesterday, the nation was praising the integrity of the late President Ford. I have very little knowledge of Mr. Ford. Eulogies also, as a general rule, tend to be kind. I listened to George H.W. and Tom Brokaw comment that Ford had no hidden agendas. President Ford did what he said. Mr. Ford brought “grace” to the Presidency, and “civility” to Washington. Ford took the hard, but wise step of pardoning Nixon. I cannot know the extent of the truth of these words about Mr. Ford. I can say that President George W. Bush would do well to embrace the notion of doing what he says, being open and forthright (not merely trying to appear to be open and forthright), being gracious, civil, and wise.
It is put-up-or-shut-up time for Mr. Bush and he has a hostile environment in which to work. Can he return to his principles and govern as Reagan did, or will he continue on his course of expediency and further dishearten the conservatives who twice elected him? Let us watch and see how he acts. Then we will know whether President Bush has had a true “Come to [Reagan]!” moment, or whether he and his writers were merely imposing a 1250 word op-ed on the readers of The Journal.
