What's with this "Is Bush a liberal" nonsense?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

I was watching a few minutes of Tucker Carlson last night and one of the topics he was covering (and I swear that I saw this somewhere else too) was whether or not Bush could be considered a "liberal" or "neoliberal". I was dumbfounded to say the least. He kept trying to get one of his guests to acknowledge that some of Bush's policies might be able to be classifed as "liberal" such as his "No Child Left Behind" initiative and possibly even the Iraq War/Occupation. Is this the start of a new "meme" floating around GOP/conservative circles, possibly in an attempt to dissociate themselves from Bush (and further smear liberalism)? Has anybody else heard about this ridiculous idea? :wtf:

[liberal N proud]

1. He is their creation, they must keep him

They can't change the definition of liberal to suit their needs, although they have tried many times.

[Buzz Clik]

2. Even here at DU, a poster spoke more highly of Bush than Pelosi.

It's the silly season.

[theoldman]

3. Bush is about as conservative as you can get.

Liberals look forward to change and Bush never wants to change.

[ixion]

9. not a 'conservative' ...* is an extremist ideologue

light on the ideology, heavy on the extreme.

[Norquist Nemesis]

4. It's like this...If he's not pleasing the "Conservatives" then he must

be the only thing that they've got: A Liberal.

Yes, it's another way to smear all things "Liberal". Anything they don't like or agree with gets slapped with the evil "Liberal" tag.

[SteppingRazor]

5. Well, it's also a misunderstanding of "neoliberal" economics...

which is definitely an economic trend of the right, not the left. It refers to globalization and free trade, and is often used in castigations of the Bush regime by far-left thinkers like Noam Chomsky.

[november3rd]

6. I'm sure it is

you know how their message machine works.

it's not reporting on reality but making the reporting the reality:

circa Ronald Reagan, when television ceased to be a medium for broadcasting the real world and the real world became a reflecting pool for what the rich and the corporate chiefs want to broadcast on tv.

So, since war bushco is a universally-recognized flop, the 2008 meme has to be he's a liberal.

It must be true, then, right, because I heard it on tv?

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/05/27/the-broken-democratic-message-machine/

[Jim__]

7. Definitely. In a few years bush will just be another miserable liberal failure - n/t

[november3rd]

10. It's inevitable

The lib/con divide is an imperative for the cons to retain ad infinitum.

Without it, they can't smearlabel anybody reasonable.

[Brigid]

8. I find it fascinating that . . .

the word "liberal," which once had very good connotations, is now used to bash anything conservatives don't like, even one of their own. I've never understood that. :(

[november3rd]

11. see Orwell

I think the relevant essay is, On Politics and the English Language

[Jackpine Radical]

12. It's the result of a deliberate propaganda campaign.

Nothing accidental about it.

[CJCRANE]

13. Freeper: "We hate liberals"

DUer: "We hate Bush"

Freeper: "Bush is a liberal!"
DUer: :nuke:

{DUer disappears in a puff of logic*}

on edit: * or so the freepers would have us believe

[zbdent]

19. nice homage to Douglas Adams ... but then, the "puff of logic"

is really "dying of laughter" ...

[Synnical]

14. Richard Cohen in yesterday's Wa Po - Bush the Neoliberal

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/28/AR2007052801053.html#

Bush the Neoliberal

By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, May 29, 2007; Page A13

Years ago, someone coined the term "neoliberal." I was never sure what it meant, and it has since fallen into disuse, but whatever the case, I'd like to revive (and mangle) the term and apply it -- brace yourself -- to George W. Bush. He's more liberal than you might think.

You recoil, I know. After all, the conventional wisdom is that Bush is the most conservative of all presidents, an advocate of limited government, minimal taxes and, when it comes to the quintessentially liberal concern with civil liberties, the man who gave us the twin black eyes of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. It's an appalling record.

But consider this: An overriding principle of conservatism is to limit the role and influence of the federal government. Nowhere is this truer than in education. For instance, there was a time when no group of Republicans could convene without passing a resolution calling for the abolition of the Education Department and turning the building -- I am extrapolating here -- into a museum of creationism.

Now, though, not only are such calls no longer heard, but Bush has extended the department's reach in a manner that Democrats could not have envisaged. I am referring, of course, to the 2001 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, better known as No Child Left Behind. I will spare you the act's details, but it pretty much tells the states to shape up or face a loss of federal funds. It is precisely the sort of law that conservatives predicted Washington would someday seek -- and it did.

[TwilightGardener]

15. It was the big-government spending that pissed them off.

[YOY]

16. The FReeper mind: Liberal = Bad, Bush = Bad so therefore Bush = Liberal

That and they're f***ing morans.

[cassiepriam]

17. Just another version of "it's Bill Clinton's fault."

[On the Road]

18. He's Not a Paleoconservative

like for example Pat Buchanan. Xenophobic, isolationist, etc. There are lots of positions Bush takes that the John Birch society doesn't agree with. Hence the charge of liberalism.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

20. Bush is a RADICAL, neither "conservative" and definitely NOT "liberal"

Bush is certainly not a "traditional" conservative and is definitely far more radical than anybody we've had for President (Republican and Democrat alike) at least in my short lifetime. I wonder if this is part of the reason that our Democratic leaders in Congress are having such a hard time fighting against him? I myself remember thinking back in 2000 when he was (s-)elected President that, although I thought that Gore had been cheated, Bush would end up becoming an unremarkable and mediocre President who'd probably only last one term like his father and it certainly seemed like his Presidency was indeed flagging after only the first few months in office. Of course, we all know what happened after 9/11 but I think that most Democrats, especially those in Congress, still continue to operate under the illusion(delusion?) that Bush is a sane and reasonable person who can be dealt with when all of the evidence has clearly been to the contrary, especially post-9/11. That they haven't seemed to grasp this after all we've been through is astounding. Also, people can point to one or two initiatives sponsored by any President and say that they prove somehow that they are a "liberal" or a "conservative" but the truth is (as I see it) that everything the Bush has done, is doing, and will do is, one way or another, geared towards consolidating his control, benefiting his contributors, and solidifying his "base". Even his patented "No Child Left Behind" initiative is more of a sop to testing businesses than a program to truly help our schoolchildren, particularly since he's never fully funded the program. And the dirty little secret that most conservatives/Republicans don't like to admit is that, as much as they rail against and decry government, they actually LOVE government......as long as it does what THEY want it to.

[Odin2005]

21. Neo-Liberal = the Tom Friedman "world is flat" Globalist Corporatist types

The "liberal" in neo-liberal is ment in the classical "lassez-faire" sense of the term, not in the way generally used here in the US.

[silverback]

22. It isn't about liberal or conservative.

The reason people ask this question, and it's a very common one, particularly among conservatives, is that all political thought can't be forced into a simple right/left spectrum.

Bush is an authoritarian collectivist, neoliberalism is a form of authoritarian collectivism and so is neoconservatism. The only real difference is what issues they feel are important. The philosophy of governance is essentiually the same, so authoritarian collectivists can be described as either liberal or conservative, and that's pretty much the choice we get come election day.

Classical liberalism had more in common with paleo-conservatism or libertarianism than with neo-liberalism or neo-conservatism, and conservatives have historically won elections on classically liberal rhetoric. (limited government power, individual liberty and responsibility, etc.)

That's why Bush's approval ratings are below freezing. (and if the real truth were known probably approaching single digits, at this point people are just having trouble admitting they were deceived and they were wrong, and worse yet liberals were right, about Bush.)

Americans, even the conservative ones, are not generally fascists.(though the fascists are extremely vocal) They didn't vote for what they got. The American people have been suffering from a sort of PTSD since 9/11, and this administration has done everything in its power to perpetuate it, because it's the only thing keeping them afloat.

[rufus dog]

23. it is the latest talking point

After the mid term elections it way "he was not conservative enough that is why we lost" they have now trotted out the neoliberal label. It allows them to wash their hands of the mistakes and blame it on a "liberal." I am just waiting for someone to use in in a discussion. It is similar the the religous right begining to embrace Rudy. Basically both come down to having no core beliefs other than winning, a group/fraternity mentality rather than admit being wrong it is twisted into "the other guy was wrong, I'm still right followed by changing the definition of victory. Watch - over the summer it will be victory with honor in Iraq, a new definition where as they have a democratically elected gov't we won and we were right, time to move on.

[applegrove]

24. neoliberal is another name for neocon. You may be right that they

will use that to paint Bush as unlike them. That is a desperate act. But apparently painting the former ruler (Bush) into the corner of the competator(Hillary, Obama, Edwards etc.) is a strategy that just worked in the French election. The GOP may have picked up on it to try and get out of the mess Bush caused and keep the party from going down the tubes and loosing supporters.