From the article:
Knowing what I know now, I would not have supported the war. But sometimes leaders must take action based on incomplete and inconclusive evidence. Where I really fault the White House is on its extreme reluctance to admit error and for inadequately preparing for the postwar operation. A willingness to admit honest error has always seemed to me to be a hallmark of great leadership. Sadly, this White House failed that test.
As someone primarily concerned with economic policy, enactment of the Medicare drug benefit hit me the way the failure to find WMD hit supporters of the war, especially on the Left, or the way Harriet Miers’s nomination affected judicial conservatives. This is going to cost taxpayers trillions upon trillions of dollars and will eventually lead to massively higher taxes, while doing little to improve the health of those who will benefit from the program or the political fortunes of the Republican Party, which sold its soul just to buy one lousy election.
6 comments:
I don't necessarily disagree with this assessment.
Very devistating and unassailable critique of Bush. What wimps at the supposedly conservative think tank, which turns out to be a flack tank for the republicans. I agree with just about all of it.
But, Nadir, many of the critiques you would reject:
- Tax cuts help the economy and increase tax revenues
- Increased govt spending hurts the economy
- Socialization of persecption drugs is bad for all parties involved, on average.
Nadir: Surely you're not suggesting that the liberal think tanks are any less likely to have one that would have done the same thing under Clinton...
"But, Nadir, many of the critiques you would reject:
- Tax cuts help the economy and increase tax revenues"
I don't necessarily disagree with this. My opposition to the Bush tax cuts was that they were targeted at cutting taxes for the rich, but not for the working class and poor. Remember, I advocate a tax program similar to Japan's which cuts taxes for the poor (those who make under the equivalent of $20k pay no taxes) and has a higher tax for the rich.
Making the Bush tax cuts permanent when costs for the illconceived war in Iraq and the national deficit were spiraling was irresponsible.
Targeted tax cuts can stimulate growth. Just target more than your corporate buddies.
- Increased govt spending hurts the economy
This can also be true depending on where the spending is. Spending more on defense and an illegal war of aggression will certainly hurt the economy. Government spending for REAL job creation could help the economy. It's just a matter of where the money goes. The goal should not be to enrich the few with the taxes of the many. If you're going to spend, the benefits should be broad.
- Socialization of persecption drugs is bad for all parties involved, on average.
Socialization of prescription drugs would only be bad for the drug companies. But your argument here is weak, because EVERY SINGLE INDUSTRIALIZED NATION EXCEPT THE UNITED STATES HAS SOCIALIZED MEDICINE AND CAPS ON PRESCRIPTION DRUG COSTS. The drug companies have adapted. But this is why Americans pay so much more for medicine than everyone else in the world. It is stupid of American politicians not to cap prices. We are behind the world in this department.
I don't remember hearing any stories of liberal think tanks firing employees who advocated the impeachment of Clinton, though MANY liberal pundits WERE in favor of impeaching Clinton.
Nadir: I also don't recall liberal think tanks firing writers for anti-Clinton missives. But I hypothesize that they are any more brave than the conservative think tanks.
Post a Comment