Really? Bush, Congress not conservative?

Just as I was beginning to think that privatizing profits and socializing losses has always been a major tenet of the Republican party, the linked Washington Post article reveals the following:

"We can't be a party of small government, free markets and low taxes while supporting bailouts and nationalizing industries, which lead to big government, socialism and high taxes at the expense of individual liberty and freedoms," said Solomon Yue, an Oregon member and co-sponsor of a resolution that criticizes the U.S. government bailouts of the financial and auto industries.

Dumbfounding, encouraging, and infuriating all at the same time.

Is this a signal of changes to come, or simply the cry of a powerless few within an increasingly irrelevant political party? Only time will tell, but as long as the corporatists are in charge or in office, there remains little hope.

On an unrelated note, in case there is anyone out there reading this blog, I highly recommend the Spengler articles found at the Asia Times Online. They are always rich in information, insight, and opinions about economic and social matters. This week's article is no exception, and explores how demographics impact the economy.

Probably My Only Pro-Bush Post

From the UK's Telegraph comes an editorial on Bush.

A quote of interest:

Much of the condemnation of his policies though is driven by a venomous hatred of Bush's personality and leadership style, rather than an objective assessment of his achievements.

This is very true, and I have been guilty of this myself. I am no fan of the exiting President, but I am sick of the piling on of criticism that Bush has received from everyone and in every form. They might as well rename the Comedy Channel to the Anti-Bush Channel, with just about every comedian, cartoon program, and faux news commentator taking repeated cheap shots at Bush. And it is not even funny anymore. How many "Bush is dumb" or "Bush can't talk" skits does anyone really need to see? I think a decent knock-knock or chicken crossing the road joke would be a little fresher and original at this point.

The Bush-bashing is partially a result of a media and nation afraid of nuance. By most of what you read and hear, you would think there are only two sides to any issue, and that you have to choose between two clear alternatives. Pro or anti-Bush, Republican or Democrat, Liberal or Conservative, Christian or Anti-Christian, Carnivore or Vegetarian, Red Sox or Yankees. The fact is, issues are a lot messier than that, and I say that is a good thing.

So, while I am not a supporter of Bush or the Iraq war, I am not blind to or unappreciative of any positive impact resulting from them. It is still to early to know how Bush's presidency will be remembered, and the writer of the editorial piece may be overly optimistic about the prospects for democracy in Iraq, but I hope in both instances he is right. It would mean that the lives of thousands of Americans would not have been sacrificed in vain, and that America, as messy as its leaders and actions may be, can still work to protect and serve the people within its borders and throughout the world.

PS - I often enjoy the Telegraph's opinions. They are at times refreshingly honest and politically incorrect, and provide interesting perspective to things American. Also, the issues the UK faces today may be what America faces tomorrow. Take this article, for example.