Conservative columnist George Will: "The accumulation accelerated in December 2003, when the Republican House leadership held open for three hours the vote on adding a prescription-drug benefit to Medicare. The time was needed to browbeat enough conservatives to pass the largest expansion of the welfare state since LBJ—an entitlement with an unfunded liability larger than that of Social Security.
The punchline: "The president's only believable veto threat in nearly five years was made to deter an attempt to cut spending by trimming the drug entitlement."
And yet Bush supporters complain about "liberal" welfare programs? Give me an effin' break!
2006-12-14 08:20:17 · 9 answers · asked by Timothy B 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
He is solidly and genetically a member of what used to be call the liberal wing of the Republican party, the Rockefeller wing. He's only been considered conservative by contrast, and not very accurately.
2006-12-14 08:52:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's an extreme social conservative not a fiscal conservative. He's fiscally liberal. (I can't belive somebody above said he's a moderate-- are you kidding me?)
It is obvious in his policies and actions....
I think he may have executed ONE, yet ONE veto while in power, increased the national debt more than any other president and yet, also signed into law, the largest entitlement program ever.
On the social side, he's advocated amending the constituion (sheesh) to ban gay marriage, limit abortions, limit stem cell research, limit privacy and civil rights in the name of protecting us, etc.
Conservative are supposed to be for smaller government, yet all conservatives in the past few decades have made government bigger. The only person I can think of that made gov smaller was Clinton. when Bush was touting all the job growth before 2004 election, he failed to mention that much of the growth in jobs was in the public sector - read more government jobs.
2006-12-14 08:25:58 · answer #2 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
exciting numbers, yet they in problem-free words deal with alterations contained in the budgets, no longer the funds themselves. the military contained in the U.S. continues to be a monster compared to... nicely... the different u . s .'s military funds. And it truly is been judged unpatriotic to even question those spendings. The U.S. military is employer welfare at its premier. do not be fooled for one 2d wondering no one is profiteering from those contracts. they're. And maximum of it truly is not making all and dissimilar safer. operating example: favourite individual Wars.
2016-11-26 19:38:35 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Conservative and right winger for sure..His extreme religious beliefs and the whole deal about him thinking he is doing "God's work" is enough to convince people of that.
2006-12-14 08:25:52 · answer #4 · answered by tchem75 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Speaking as a conservative, he is NOT a conservative. He's a moderate.
BTW Steve, true conservatism leads to SMALLER government. IT is liberalism and statism that lead to bigger government.
2006-12-14 08:25:00 · answer #5 · answered by Firestorm 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
He's massively increased the national debt. That's pretty conservative.
In fact, in that sense, he really is just picking up where Reagan left off.
And remember, it was Cheney who said "Deficits don't matter."
2006-12-14 08:22:26 · answer #6 · answered by Steve 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because he tells people he is, and conservatives aren't allowed to question, so he must be.
2006-12-14 08:23:13 · answer #7 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
It didn't help him. The libs hate him no matter what he does.
2006-12-14 08:25:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
ALL PRESIDENTS....LIBS & CONS....MOVE TOWARD THE CENTER AFTER BEING ELECTED....ITS PART AND PARCEL OF BEING THE PRESIDENT OF THE "WHOLE" COUNTRY.
2006-12-14 08:24:33 · answer #9 · answered by Rich S 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋