Bush Inconsistencies on Policy Matters
Original post made by A Boomer, Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jun 20, 2007
1. Sanctity of human life: Shrub has announced he will again veto a stem cell research bill that would use human embryos that otherwise would be destroyed, as he states that it crosses the ethical boundaries of dealing with human life. He gets an "F" since his administration appears to put limited value on human lives such as our injured armed forces members, who are getting poor medical care while still in the service and once into the VA system, as has been widely reported. The conditions in New Orleans, and the indifference the Shrub administration has exhibited to the human suffering still going on there is another reason for the F" grade.
2. Irresponsible government spending: Shrub has suddenly gotten indignant about the wasteful ways of Congress, now that the Democrats are back in power, and has the veto pen out again to make sure the federal budget stays under control. This is the same President conducting a multi-billion dollar war in Iraq "off the books," and who inherited a federal budget generating surpluses, and that is now showing deficits in the hundreds of billions of dollars. "F" grade, Shrub.
3. Extolling the virtues of democracy: Shrub expresses concerns about the lack of progress in Russia toward true democracy, props up the current Iraqi regime as "democratically elected,", and yet back-pedaled on supporting the Hamas party when it was democratically chosen by the Palestinians, and like virtually every other US administration, keeps quiet with the likes of China, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, among others, that have stable albeit non-democratic, regimes. Appears reliability is more important than democracy, which is a defensible "real politik" position, but much more difficult to reconcile with Shrub's simplistic belief that there is no problem that cannot be solved by a democratically chosen regime. F's in Political Science, History, Organizational Management, and Rhetoric.
I am among those that believe this is one of the worst administrations this country has ever had, so I come from that bias. Nevertheless, these are three very current examples of inconsistent, poorly thought out positions that are rife with contradictions and make it difficult, if not impossible for countries, states and private organizations to understand where the foundation in policy is. Agree or disagree with the Shrub Administration, on the three examples above, we all have the opportunity to do both, whatever position we take.
What was that about Kerry being a flip-flopper? Maybe cynicism is the only prevailing policy on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue these days.