Thursday, December 17, 2009, 8:56AM ET - U.S. Markets open in 34 mins..

Charles Wheelan, Ph.D. The Naked Economist

Charles Wheelan, Ph.D., The Naked Economist

Liberal Spending, No Social Perks: Call It Neo-Neoconservatism

by Charles Wheelan, Ph.D.

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story
Excellent (1138 Ratings)
4.223216/5
Posted on Tuesday, August 5, 2008, 12:00AM

Two different headlines over the past week have confirmed what's been increasingly obvious for a long time: George W. Bush is no conservative.

Glaring Contradictions

In case you missed them, here's a review:

1. Bush signs the housing bailout.

Here's my best summary of the housing debacle: Homeowners borrowed much more than they could afford; banks gleefully loaned them the money; and then Wall Street, the self-described smartest people on the planet, bought large quantities of those securitized loans. Which part of that couldn't have been prevented with a little more foresight (and a lot less greed)?

Conservatives are supposed to be about personal responsibility, not government bailouts.

2. The administration announced that the federal budget deficit is projected to be $390 billion this fiscal year and $480 billion next year.

That's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to unfunded future liabilities. Can you say "baby boomers in retirement"? There's been no progress whatsoever over the past seven years to rein in entitlement spending. In fact, the Medicare prescription drug benefit adds hundreds of billions of new federal spending when we still haven't figured out how we'll pay for the entitlement promises we've already made.

How Sweet It Isn't

If you want to know how bad this problem is likely to get, check out this alarming graph from the Heritage Foundation based on data from the Congressional Budget Office. (Warning to parents: The graph is inappropriate for children -- not because it's pornographic, but because they'll realize how much your generation is totally shafting them.)

Federal Budget Deficit as a Percentage of GDP, 1962-2082

The graph shows what policy types have known for a long time: The U.S. has amassed liabilities over the next half century that far outstrip our capacity to pay for them. The Bush administration has made it worse by lowering revenues (the tax cuts) and adding to what we'll owe (the prescription drug benefit).

Reckless Behavior

Conservatives are supposed to be about balancing the budget and limiting the size of government, not about adding new entitlement programs and borrowing money from China to pay for them.

Even the Iraq War -- whether you love it or hate it -- can't possibly be described as a conservative act. Conservatives, in the tradition of Edmund Burke, are supposed to believe in limited government and measured change (as opposed to radical departures from the status quo). Using the military to replace a sovereign regime as a first step toward reshaping the Middle East as a democracy is not a conservative approach.

True, the threat of weapons of mass destruction may have called for quick and dramatic action. But all evidence that has trickled out since the war began suggests that Bush and his supporting cast of neoconservatives -- a complete misnomer if there ever was one -- wanted radical regime change long before the WMD issue arose.

Liberal Spending

So what is George W. Bush? He's certainly no liberal, either. In fact, we're left with the worst of all worlds: liberal-style spending without the stuff it usually buys.

Seven years of fiscal recklessness hasn't solidified a tattered safety net, or fixed a broken health care system, or upgraded the skills base of America's working class, or improved our crumbling infrastructure, or updated our outmoded international institutions. (Does anybody really believe that France deserves a permanent veto on the U.N. Security Council while India -- the world's largest democracy -- doesn't?) We're spending like drunken sailors, but we're not even getting the hookers and booze.

We did get big tax cuts, but it's getting harder and harder to argue that they were some kind of miracle balm for the economy. And I would have been far more impressed by those cuts if we'd gotten corresponding spending cuts. That's what small government is supposed to be -- lower taxes and less spending. For all intents and purposes we got tax postponements instead, and the bill will eventually come due.

Faux Conservativism

Republicans are starting to distance themselves from Bush. There's something pathetic and unprincipled about that, given that they were complicit in the policies that have made him unpopular. If the Republicans truly stood for sensible conservative policies, they would have ditched him six or seven years ago -- and we'd be better off for it.

The tragedy of the Bush presidency is twofold. First, we've dug ourselves into a huge fiscal hole with essentially nothing to show for it but IOUs to the rest of the world. That's not conservative, and it's not a big-government liberal either. I'm not even sure we have a word for it.

Second, the Republicans are now intellectually adrift. (To be clear, the Democrats have been intellectually adrift for at least 20 years.) The Republicans jumped on the Bush train because they wanted to back a winner, even as that train lurched in directions that cannot possibly be described as conservative.

I know conservatives. Conservatives are friends of mine. You, George Bush, are no conservative. And shame on the Republicans for not recognizing that sooner.

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story

Rate This story

Excellent (1138 Ratings)
4/5
Sign-in to rate!

401 Comments

Showing comments 6-35 of 401<< PreviousNext >>
Sort: first to last

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Sunday, October 5, 2008, 8:13AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    I am so sick of all the one sided finger pointing - from both sides! If you want to understand the problem you need look no further than the repeal of the Glass-Steagal act in 1999 and understand how it allowed Wall St to run a muck as it proceeded to fill it's pockets with record profits and bonuses based on flawed and reckless business decisions. Then take a look at how each side of our elected officials voted on the repeal motion. Pathetic. 90% of our those responsible for making decisions in our best interest voted Yea. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00354#position Absolutely disgusting! It is time that WE, THE PEOPLE, take responsibility for electing the career politicians which allowed this to occur and vote them all out. They are no less guilty than those on Wall St and Main St that profited from this mess. Mark my words - It will be years, maybe a decade, before we recover from this latest binge of greed. The suffering we've seen to date is just the seedling of what we've sown.

  • Alex - Sunday, September 28, 2008, 1:07PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    this article has helped me to understand slightly the insanity of our nation. we will never change directions until the average person who is not identified as republican or democrat but every 4 years decides it is on every day we must be involved and informed. we must be our bothers keeper and watchdog at the same time. the first step in change is to recognize the behavior that requires change. our 2 party system may no longer be effective in this day of incredible complexity both financially and ethically. we live everyday at school and work compromising and being tolerant of our co-workers, bosses and family. maybe if we had parties that overlapped in ideas and direction we could find a more common groundl and work together as a we do in our everyday lives. maybe we need a strong independent party, lets put our bailout money into the solution, government for the people by the people. a 2 party system does not include all the people.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Friday, September 26, 2008, 5:45PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    HA HA HA!! Chucky arse rapes the GOP true believers!! He says "I'm not sure we have a word for it." We do Chucky, Mr. PhD!! It's called ASININE!!! ROFLMFAO!!!!!

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Sunday, September 21, 2008, 12:00AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    You made a good argument for how reckless the Republicans (can't blame Bush alone - he couldn't have done anything without the USA chanting, "moral and family values chanting, "pro-life", but not with death sentences and gun crimes Republicans) have put our national security, economic security, and the future of our country at peril. But why do you have to apologize everytime you write something factual to your Republican folks? Because they'd label you a communist or accuse you of putting your popularity on Yahoo above your country? Why do you have to take a needless dig at democrats when there is no analysis of their policies? Do you realize that your allegiance to the Republican party is the exact kind of blind/fanatic allegiance that most Republicans have given to Bush that engendered this travesty that you are now simply blaming on Bush?

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Saturday, September 20, 2008, 4:59PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    Neo-Conservative?.....Sounds like we've been there before. Doesn't it go hand in hand with the other Neo..... Neo-Imperialism? The super-rich greedy bastards destroying world economies and the environment. Greed is the root of all evil....Wake up everyone!!

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 6:03PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    To the poster who equated modern "Republicans" with Bible-thumpers... interesting. Perhaps we should say "Militant Christian"? party

  • Shantu - Monday, September 1, 2008, 10:37AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    A conservative is a conservative as long he thumps Bible and is against abortion. He is still a conservative if he spends all he has and all you have and all our children would have, as long as he thumps his Bible and opposes abortion.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Monday, August 25, 2008, 5:59AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    When do you know all hell is about to break lose ... when you read open up the daily and you read the things the government does and you wonder whether you are living in China or the US ... when "private companies" look to the state to print $$$ to help beautify their balance sheets and fund their so-called upgrading or expansion plans, when the government steps in to negotiate with the unions. So are we living in China or the US? Does US mean United Socialist Republic?!!!

  • raising4daughters - Thursday, August 21, 2008, 2:19PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    George W. Bush, like his father, is a joke. Conservative? You must be kidding. He may be a social conservative, but his "neo-conservative" policies violate REAL conservatism. He's been anything BUT conservative with our nation's blood, treasure, and resources. The US may never recover from the horrific policies of W and Daddy.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 19, 2008, 8:48PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    This was evident from his time in Texas as well, he was just able to be as incredibly ignorant and foolish on a national level.

  • Todd - Thursday, August 14, 2008, 3:43PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    thanks for pointing out what I knew 6 years ago. The Bush is the most liberal spender since LBJ. He is a big government Liberal. The only difference between the two is liberals will raise taxes to pay for the programs and Bush borrows to pay for them. Obama offers more of the same. All his policies include new spending. McCain while not much better has stated he will go after pork spending which is a plus in my book. The baby boomers are just going to have to swallow the pill and admit their policies they have fought for over the last 40 years have not been right. We need to decrease Social security, decrease medicare, and increase military spending.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, August 13, 2008, 6:46AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    So what do you do if you are a libertarian? I am socially liberal, and fiscally conservative? I plan on voting for the LP, but I would rather take a democrat like John Mccain over a socialist like Barrack Hussein.

  • Michael - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 9:33PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    This is another typical artucle blaming Bush for 75 years of crappy fuscal decisions by thousands of craven politicians buying votes,

  • Grant - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 7:27PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Well it might have (and maybe should have?) been apparent when he ran on "compassionate conservatism." An economic interpretation would have been compassionate=spending conservatism=tax cuts. Of course, conservatism is also supposed to mean "smaller gov't" - but in a political sense, not an economic one. However, 9/11 clearly reshuffled his priorities. Being a wartime president is not congruent with budget-balancing. to claim that 9/11 changed this Administration's priorities and that his Party and his Country grudgingly followed is a verifiable certainty. To prescribe a label to this fact however does not help whatever predicament we are in. We got in this predicament trying to do the right thing. And now we can do the right thing by getting out.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 7:22PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Excellent article. Bush destroyed the modern conservative movement by making the Republican party a one-issue movement: the Iraq war. That single issue has been used for the past 7 years, by both sides, to either honor or vilify. Look no further than Joe Lieberman and Ron Paul. The former, a liberal democrat, is actually on the short list for McCain's veep nomination. The latter, true small government, non-intervention conservative, is ostracized. Conservatives have abdicated their principles to support Mr. Bush's war. And, as Wheelan notes, the country has had the worst of both worlds: a liberal spendthrift idiot in the white house and a backlash against conservative thought. That being said, I can't imagine having Edwards or Gore in the executive branch!

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 6:37PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Conservative???????????? How conservative was a Hitler or Mussolini?????????

  • bob - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 3:14PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    It took a PHD until almost Sept 08' to figure out what a fiscal disaster bush has been?? LMFAO!! Sane people with an IQ over 50 knew this abiout 6 years ago junior PHD. Second, I suggest MR Wheelan you please study a little bit of US gov fiscal history. You claim that Bush is some "new" kind of non-conservative conservative. Nonsense!! The Republicans have not had a conservative fiscal leader since the 60's as in 1960's. George W. Bush is merely a perfectly replicated copy of the same EXACT "wild budget deficit spending while lowering taxes on the ultra wealthy" trickle down your leg supply side BS economic policies we saw during 8 long years of Ron Reagan. In 8 years in office Reagan like Bush W and like Bush's father never balanced a single budget. The last 20 years of republican presidencies have failed to balance even 1 budget so george W bush is certainly nothing new regarding republican fiscal irresponsobity he is a mere continuation of it. In the last 30 years only one, yes one US President has consistently balanced his budgets and that guy was named William Jefferson Clinton who in 8 years of office in the 90's balanced his last 5, count em 5 budgets = SCOREBOARD BABY!! The main differences between republicans and democrats when it comes to fiscal issues in recent decades is simple - while democrats would choose to spend money on the most needy and balance budgets, the republican leadership chooses to spend money on the least needy (think large cap oil, pharmaceutical, defense contractor and agri businesses) and basically hand out every tax break they can to the ultra wealthy who already evade billions upon billions in taxes with legal and semi legal loopholes and offshoring of their income. Reagan put this country through 8 years of his silly supply side economic voodoo Bullsheot just as Bush W has and like Bush W it also ended in failure. Bu 1987, after 6 straight years of Reagans silly deficit spending and massive tax cuts for the wealthy we were headed into a frimly esta\blished resceesion, a stock market crash in October of 87' and 6 long more years of fiscal mess before Clinto took office and cleaned up the mess left behind by toddlers reagan and Bush sr. All these deficit factoids are easily researchable at the official website for gov spending cbot.gov, the congressional budget office for thoise of you who ignore history or choose to selectively lie about it. LOL

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 2:23PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    I sense your frustration and I "feel your pain". This country has been sold out by its Congress for decades. Our government has now reached stratospheric size and still many Americans (if you can call them that) call for more and more government. Two things Dr. Wheeler...1) Tax cuts are ALWAYS good and 2) The FairTax. Thanks for the article. (a man without a candidate) Georgia

  • Popat - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 1:54PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    The republicans sold this country out years ago.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 11:44AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I agree completely. Profligate spending bible thumping warmonger is what Bush is. I think he is the second worst president of the last 100 years.

  • r13 - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 10:59AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    Well, yes, but where have you been? This overspending by self-styled conservatives started with Ronald Reagan.

  • Dave - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 10:19AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Minus 1 star for not mentioning the only presidential candidate that will actually address this issue, Bob Barr, Libertarian. C'mon Americans, be a leader, not a follower, vote for real change. Shame on those for voting for Republicans or Democrats and expecting different results. Sending a message with your vote is better than voting for the lesser of two evils then sitting around and complaining about everything.

  • Steve - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 10:07AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    I consider myself a conservative, but I NEVER voted for George. You paint with a prodigious brush. Yes, Bush did add billions in unfunded prescription drug liabilities to Medicare. But the majority of unfunded liabilities, are the result of LIBERALs' buying votes during the past 70 years. Who started social security? Who started Medicare? Who instills fear of retirement and healthcare in the minds of voters? LIBERALS. Ben Franklin once said that when the people find that they can vote themselfs money that that would be the end of the republic. Ben is starting to look more and more prescient all the time.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 9:57AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    The republicans sold out years ago. They are no longer financial conservatives, they are christian conservatives.

  • C - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 8:33AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    All true only the money did not disappear all of his and Cheneys friends have it. Its called fleecing............

  • MikeD - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 7:57AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Hate to say it, but he's absolutely right.

  • Feem O - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 6:10AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Very good. Only one star off for being late! 2 words: Ron Paul

  • amy - Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 1:25AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I agree completely with the comments about the need for a libertarian but we can all forget it. The two major parties (made up of prostitutes that have sold us out) have the money thing all sewed up and it simply cannot be won without money. Democrats and Republicans have a stranglehold on the government and only a Great Depression II could break it. We might get that with the reckless fiscal and monetary policies implemented by these two miserable parties. In all likelihood, we're just toast. If you are lucky enough to have enjoyed the great period from 1946 to the early 1970s, good for you. Everyone else is just toast any way you look at it. We could last this way (in decline) for a long time. Look how long it took Rome to finally collapse after it started the long descent.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Monday, August 11, 2008, 10:44PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    It's taken you 7 years to write this? Have you been asleep the whole time?! To write this 3 months before the next President is elected takes absolutely no balls on your behalf. Good point, but 6 years way late.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Monday, August 11, 2008, 5:49PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    The missing word you were looking for I think might be INSANE

Showing comments 6-35 of 401<< PreviousNext >>
The columns, articles, message board posts and any other features provided on Yahoo! Finance are provided for personal finance and investment information and are not to be construed as investment advice. Under no circumstances does the information in this content represent a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security. The views and opinions expressed in an article or column are the author's own and not necessarily those of Yahoo! and there is no implied endorsement by Yahoo! of any advice or trading strategy.

More From Charles Wheelan

Naked Economics: Undressing the Dismal Science

An accessible and entertaining introduction to economics for lay readers, now available in paperback.

View more about Charles Wheelan.

The Chicago Tribune described Naked Economics as "clear, concise, informative and (gasp) witty."

Order Naked Economics today. Average customer review on Amazon.com: 4.7 out of 5 stars.

More from Yahoo! Sources

  • CNN Money
  • Consumer Reports
  • Kiplinger
  • The Motley Fool
  • Business Week
  • Wall Street Journal

Historical chart data and daily updates provided by Commodity Systems, Inc. (CSI). International historical chart data and daily updates provided by Morningstar, Inc. Fundamental company data provided by Capital IQ. Quotes and other information supplied by independent providers identified on the Yahoo! Finance partner page. Quotes are updated automatically, but will be turned off after 25 minutes of inactivity. Quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes. Real-Time continuous streaming quotes are available through our premium service. You may turn streaming quotes on or off. All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Neither Yahoo! nor any of independent providers is liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. By accessing the Yahoo! site, you agree not to redistribute the information found therein.

Yahoo! Answers is provided for informational purposes only, and no Q&A is intended for trading or investing purposes. Yahoo! shall not be responsible or liable for the accuracy, usefulness or availability of any Q&A information, and shall not be responsible or liable for any trading or investment decisions based on such information. View Complete Answers Disclaimer.