Comparing a Mighty Oak to a Bush

At the time of Reagan's presidency, I disagreed with him on most issues and resented his phony-baloney persona and staged photo-op manner of conducting himself. (That last phrase is a misnomer as, in truth, he was conducted — primarily by Michael Deaver and his wife Nancy.)

They say ‘speak not ill of the dead,' which in this case will prove difficult, but I'll start by admitting that his "Tear down this wall" speech was perhaps the boldest presidential moment of post-WWII administrations, and did contribute, as did his stalwart actions, to the demise of the Soviet Union.

My paramount concern isn't the debate about the late President Reagan, but the current policies of the now President Bush, and how we should react to them. Perhaps the Reagan model can be useful in dissecting the anatomy of this president, especially considering that conservative partisans spent the week after the former president's death spinning like crazy that GWB was the heir of RR, and cut from the same mold. This is a lot of (pardon my French) malarkey.

The only similarity — besides, OK, a basic simple-mindedness — is that they both cut taxes immediately upon attaining the White House. But Reagan, when shown the facts that his tax cuts were too much, and would overly burden the economy and cripple the next generation, raised income and payroll taxes. Pragmatically and responsibly.

Junior Bush, in practically the same circumstance, and with the knowledge that the U.S. was conducting war in Afghanistan, and about to conduct war (and occupation) in Iraq, pushed through even more tax cuts -- because that was the most important thing to his family, friends, and upper-class clientele.