Baby Bush: The Worst President in History?

Reddit

I recognize that I’ve antagonized many of my subscribers over the years with “Bush Bashing.” In January, just after OBAMA!’s election, I said I wouldn’t mention Bush again, his departure having made him irrelevant. I only feel bad that he and his minions will apparently get away scot- free with their crimes; better they had all been brought up before a tribunal and tried for crimes against humanity in general and the US Constitution in particular. But that is objectively true of almost all presidents since at least Lincoln.

Most of our subscribers to The Casey Report appear to be libertarians or classical liberals – i.e., people who believe in a maximum of both social and economic freedom for the individual. The next largest group are “conservatives.” It’s a bit harder to define a conservative. Is it someone who atavistically just wants to conserve the existing order of things (either now, or perhaps as they perceived them 50, or 100, or 200, or however many years ago)? Or is a conservative someone who believes in limiting social freedoms (generally that means suppressing things like sex, drugs, outré clothing and customs, and bad-mouthing the government) while claiming to support economic freedoms (although with considerable caveats and exceptions)? It’s unclear to me what, if any, philosophical foundation conservatism, by whatever definition, rests on.

Which leads me to the question: Why do conservatives seem to have this warm and fuzzy feeling for George W. Bush? I can only speculate it’s because Bush liked to talk a lot about freedom and traditional American values, and did so in such an ungrammatical way that it made him seem sincere. Bush’s tendency to fumble words and concepts contrasted to Clinton’s eloquence, which made him look “slick.”

I’m forced to the conclusion that what “conservatives” like about Bush is his style, such as it was. Because the only good thing I can recall that Bush ever did was to shepherd through some tax cuts. But even these were targeted and piecemeal, tossing bones to favored interests, rather than any principled abolition of any levies or a wholesale cut in rates.

Is it possible that Bush was actually the worst president ever? I’d say he’s a strong contender. He started out with a gigantic lie – that he would cut the size of government, reduce taxes, and stay out of foreign wars – and things got much worse from there. Let’s look at just some of the highpoints in the catalog of disasters the Bush regime created.

  • No Child Left Behind. Forget about abolishing the Department of Education. Bush made the federal government a much more intrusive and costly part of local schools.
  • Project Safe Neighborhoods. A draconian law that further guts the 2nd Amendment, like 20,000 other unconstitutional gun laws before it.
  • Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. This the largest expansion of the welfare state since LBJ and will cost the already bankrupt Medicare system trillions more.
  • Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Possibly the most expensive and restrictive change to the securities laws since the ’30s. A major reason why companies will either stay private or go public outside the US.
  • Katrina. A total disaster of bureaucratic mismanagement, featuring martial law.
  • Ownership Society. The immediate root of the current financial crisis lies in Bush’s encouragement of easy credit to everybody and inflating the housing market.
  • Nationalizations and Bailouts. In response to the crisis he created, he nationalized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and passed by far the largest bailouts in US history (until OBAMA!).
  • Free-Speech Zones. Originally a device for keeping war protesters away when Bush appeared on camera, they’re now used to herd.
  • The Patriot Act. This 132-page bill, presented for passage only 45 days after 9/11 (how is it possible to write something of that size and complexity in only 45 days?) basically allows the government to do whatever it wishes with its subjects. Warrantless searches. All kinds of communications monitoring. Greatly expanded asset forfeiture provisions.
  • The War on Terror. The scope of the War on Drugs (which Bush also expanded) is exceeded only by the war on nobody in particular but on a tactic. It’s become a cause of mass hysteria and an excuse for the government doing anything.
  • Invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush started two completely pointless, counterproductive, and immensely expensive wars, neither of which has any prospect of ending anytime soon.
  • Dept. of Homeland Security. This is the largest and most dangerous of all agencies, now with its own gigantic campus in Washington, DC. It will never go away and centralizes the functions of a police state.
  • Guantanamo. Hundreds of individuals, most of them (like the Uighurs recently in the news) guilty only of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, are incarcerated for years. A precedent is set for anyone who is accused of being an “enemy combatant” to be completely deprived of any rights at all.
  • Abu Ghraib and Torture. After imprisoning scores of thousands of foreign nationals, Bush made it a US policy to use torture to extract information, based on a suspicion or nothing but a guard’s whim. This is certainly one of the most damaging things to the reputation of the US ever. It says to the world, “We stand for nothing.”
  • The No-Fly List. His administration has placed the names of over a million people on this list, and it’s still growing at about 20,000 a month. I promise it will be used for other purposes in the future…
  • The TSA. Somehow the Bush cabal found 50,000 middle-aged people who were willing to go through their fellow citizens’ dirty laundry and take themselves quite seriously. God forbid you’re not polite to them…
  • Farm Subsidies. Farm subsidies are the antithesis of the free market. Rather than trying to abolish or cut them back, Bush signed a record $190 billion farm bill.
  • Legislative Free Ride. And he vetoed less of what Congress did than any other president in history.

The only reason I can imagine why a person who is not “evil” (to use a word he favored), completely uninformed, or thoughtless would favor Bush is because he wasn’t a Democrat. Not that there’s any real difference between the two parties anymore…

As disastrous as he was, I rather hate to put him in competition for “worst president” in the company of Lincoln, McKinley, Wilson, the two Roosevelts, Truman, Johnson, and Nixon. He is simply too small a character – psychologically aberrant, ignorant, unintelligent, shallow, duplicitous, small-minded – to merit inclusion in any list. On second thought, looking over that list of his personal characteristics, he’s probably most like FDR, except he lacked FDR’s polish and rhetorical skills. I suspect he’ll just fade away as a non-entity, recognized as an embarrassment. Not even worth the trouble of hanging by his heels from a lamppost, although Americans aren’t (yet) accustomed to doing that to their leaders. Those who once supported him will, at least if they have any circumspection and intellectual honesty, feel shame at how dim they were to have been duped by a nobody.

The worst shame of Bush – worse than the spending, the new agencies, the torture, or the wars – is that he used so much pro-liberty and pro- free-market rhetoric in the very process of destroying those institutions. That makes his actions ten times worse than if an avowed socialist had done the same thing. People will blame the full suite of disasters Bush caused on the free market simply because Bush constantly said he believed in it.

And he’s left OBAMA! with a fantastic starting point for what I expect to be even greater intrusions into your life and finances. Eventually, the Bush era will look like The Good Old Days. But only in the way that the Romans looked back with nostalgia on Tiberius and Claudius after they got Caligula. And then Nero. And then the first of many imperial coups and civil wars.

Regards,

Doug Casey
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

Doug Casey
Doug Casey of Casey Research, author of the best sellers Strategic Investing, Crisis Investing and Crisis Investing for the Rest of the 90’s, has lived in seven countries and visited over 100 more. He has appeared on scores of major radio and TV shows and remains an active speculator in the stock, bond, commodity, and real estate markets around the world. In his spare time, Doug engages in competitive shooting and plays polo.
Doug Casey

Latest posts by Doug Casey (see all)

Reddit

Comments

  1. Yes, Bush took a lot from personal freedom. But he believed in God and that single fact means that he took morality into consideration when making decisions.

    Immorality destroys the economy.

    When the government is reduced, Morality Needs to Increase to Replace Government Expansion

    And finally, Morality Proceeds Economy So Always Vote For Morality

    Much of the conservative foundation is built on a clear understanding of the value of a moral people, just as our founding fathers trusted God rather than the government. If we replace government with leaders that do not trust God, we will end up with strong dictators that rule with iron.

    Yes we need personal freedom, but it takes more then freedom to create prosperity. It takes reason and that reason is found in understanding individual purpose which is found is the discovery of our true identity in Jesus Christ.

    Reply
  2. I agree with all the points made here, but I believe that the time for partisan debate is over. Obama represents a much larger threat than Bush ever did. Bush was demonic looking, impish even, stupid, and outwardly evil. Everyone knew what he was about. Obama, on the other hand, is a slick tongued, good looking black man who has a much better chance fooling people into thinking he’s on their side. His whole front is fake, everything he says is a lie and the people have no idea where they stand with him.

    Obama has been able to raise support at the grass roots level like Bush would have only dreamed of. He has formed youth brigades, and “compulsory volunteerism” (doublespeak?) like City Year and the like where they dance around in kahkis and brown shirts chanting his name, like something out of a Hitlerian nightmare. People are branding Obama as a socialist, but is so far in the pocket of wallstreet, that he is nothing short of a fascist.

    I would argue that this was planned some time in advance. Knowing that Bush would be a nightmare, the people would be screaming for “change”, and just at the right time the pre-groomed Obama steps onto the stage as the keynote speaker at the DNC in 2004. You only have to scan quickly over the list of his appointess to see that most of them are throwbacks from Clinton, Bush and even Carter administrations (Zbigniew Brzezinski was Carter’s National Security Advisor and now he is Obama’s foreign policy advisor). Brzezinski is key and has been coined the “father of islamic fundamentalism” just take a look at this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJTv2nFjMBk
    Also read some of his books like: “Between Two Ages”, “The Grand Chessboard” etc. It would seem from his writings that the agenda is well and truly on track, and Obama is his main man.

    Obama is just the next puppet, the next in line to keep the shadowy “parallel government” in power and out of the limelight. We must tear down their facade and expose the people who are really running the show.

    http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/infowars-shop_2066_5388266

    Reply
  3. And the same 300 million people who voted Bush in twice, voted in Obama because they reckoned Bush wasn’t making their lives easy enough. And some dorks in other countries thought that might somehow be good for them??? People like that have got no more concept of what America is about than the average brainwashed American who truly believes that their nation is some sort of blessing to the world.

    A fundamentally dishonest and self serving nation that is driven by its rapacious hunger for money and oil. With lots of very naive, priviledged and easily manipulated citizens who have huge expectations and an entitlement mentality.

    If I had my way I’d build a big plastic bubble over the joint that contained their share of the world’s air and periodically poke in their share of the world’s oil over the next 50 years (providing they were poking out some wheat or corn to pay for it with) while we wait to see if they can learn to play nicely with others.

    Yeh, America is a bloody big worry.

    Reply
  4. Curt,

    I can only presume that as you are a follower of God/Christ/The holy son/The holy Trinity, or what ever ! That you are a Bush supporter, and that you would have voted for him in both the 2000 and 2004 elections.
    Excuse me if I am completely wrong here, but that is the logical inference that I get from your post.

    If that is the case, you should (in my most honest and humble opinion) be ashamed of yourself. To have narrowly (and with the help of some of his relatives) elected him in 2000, you failed in your responsibility to realise he was an incapable idiot and re-elected him.

    People who did this in America in 2004 should collectively hang their heads in shame whilst the rest of the World mocks them en-mass.

    Reply
  5. The first time I saw Bush talk so loudly about freedom I new he was a wolf in sheeps clothing. Curt you have been deceived.

    Reply
  6. Now tell us how you really feel…………really.

    The fact is we were still reeling from 9/11 (think back). This is how Bush got re-elected. I agree with about 20% of what you have to say. Bush was not a leader. He was not disciplined. His “Compassionate Conservatism” in its essence is nothing more than Liberalism.

    He campaigned on Conservative Principals then governed with his heart. He completely abandoned the principals he espoused. Shame on him for that.

    I supported him until his last year. I gave him credit for holding his ground on the “Surge” in Iraq during Politico-Media-Industrial-Complex onslaught. I overlooked the Rx thing. But the TARP nonsense was over-the-top.

    An NFL coach knows that even after going more that 50% of the field and plenty of time on the clock you punt on 4th down. To do otherwise would be to go against your principals and risk the game for your team. At such a point you must ignore your feelings and reveal your discipline.

    This is Mr. Bush’s greatest error. His fundamental lack of conservative discipline. This is the underlying factor in all of his foibles.

    Reply
  7. Bush shouldn’t have ignored those educational administrators, should he, CA? ;)

    Biker Pete, Charlottetown, PEI
    August 22, 2009
    Reply
  8. I’m with you on this one Ned

    Reply
  9. The Military Industrial Complex has won, same as they did in Vietnam.
    Obama = Bush = Controlled by higher powers (CFR, AIPAC, …)

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Letters will be edited for clarity, punctuation, spelling and length. Abusive or off-topic comments will not be posted. We will not post all comments.
If you would prefer to email the editor, you can do so by sending an email to letters@dailyreckoning.com.au