John Farmer, Newhouse News Service
September 19, 2004
(snip)
Consider what Bush has done so far: Arbitrarily abrogated the anti-ballistic missile treaty with Russia; pushed through tax cuts that reduced the progressivity of the tax code to reward the deserving rich; drove the federal deficit to an all-time high; launched a preemptive attack in the name of fighting terrorism on a country (Iraq) that had nothing to do with the 9/11 murders; adopted a foreign policy of unilateralism that tells allies in Europe to go stick it.
It's a high-roller approach. And, if reelected, Bush proposes even more radical change -- privatization of federal pension (Social Security) and health insurance systems, a "guest worker" amnesty program for illegal immigrants and making tax cuts (now temporary) permanent -- a move that would add still more red ink to federal ledgers.
(snip)
In four years, Bush has not vetoed a single spending bill or any other bill for that matter. His philosophy seems to be "Let the good times roll!" How to pay for it? Economic expansion will do the trick, he says. And if it doesn't? Do what Americans everywhere do: Put it on the credit card. Party now, pay later.
Now consider Kerry. If his campaign is any indicator, the guy's so cautious he wouldn't risk a wager on the winner in a one-horse derby... Even on Iraq, Kerry resists exploiting a situation that, if it gets much worse, could bring down the Bush presidency. Kerry backs the war; he opposes only Bush's handling of it... Kerry's a toe-in-the-water politician. Bush is a full-immersion believer in radical change. Under either man federal spending will increase, but with this difference: Kerry would pay for it with tax increases; Bush by borrowing the money.
So who's the real conservative? Who's the real radical?
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/4987209.html