The Republican Party Has Lost Its Way

Tea Party Protests Were Welcome Sign Against Big Government Spending

(CBS)  At last week's Tea Party rally in San Francisco, protesters waved signs with slogans including "Overtaxation is Tyranny," "A Debt We Can Never Clear," and "No More Bailouts." Some signs blamed President Obama, saying "ObamaNomics: Chains We Can Believe In."

Critiques of taxes and bailouts are worthy sentiments, of course. The U.S. income tax system is broken, with an astonishing 43.4 percent of American "taxpayers" paying no personal income taxes; while those that do see their checks funneled through bailouts to such deserving causes as AIG, Goldman Sachs, and large European banks.

But the problem with the Tea Party movement is that the same complaints can be lodged against former President George W. Bush. It was the Bush administration that bailed out AIG; it bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; it bailed out Citigroup; it bailed out Bear Stearns. And it was the Bush administration that pressed Congress to bail out Detroit automakers.

Where were those hand-printed signs last week -- or last year -- assailing "BushNomics?" Where were these same conservatives when the Republicans and the Federal Reserve were on a bailout bender last year? Or when the GOP doubled the size of the federal debt?

Plus, if you want to get technical, it was the Republicans who raised taxes every year by increasing the amount of income subject to Social Security taxes, and it was Mr. Bush who once mulled a huge hike that would have raised those taxes far more.

The uncomfortable truth is that the conservative movement has lost its way. It probably won't be able to find the path toward limited government and fiscal responsibility until it distances itself from Mr. Bush and his allies among Beltway Republicans.

In the 1990s, Beltway conservatives railed against Clintonian military skirmishes like Kosovo, saying the Europeans could handle their own problems. Then, in the 2000s, they championed Bush's far more expensive -- and, as it turns out, less justifiable -- invasion and occupation of Iraq.

In the 1990s, Beltway conservatives protested an FBI Internet-wiretapping device originally called Carnivore and renamed DCS1000. They held oversight hearings about the Clinton-era FBI and electronic privacy. Then, in the 2000s, many invented novel excuses for the Bush administration's warrantless, and probably illegal, surveillance.

In the 1990s, Beltway conservatives denounced President Clinton's relatively modest budgets as "more domestic spending" and "bigger deficits." The outcry was minimal when Mr. Bush kicked off far larger deficit spending programs including the whopping Medicare prescription drug benefit while signing bills with billions more in domestic spending than he had requested from Congress.

In other words, after Mr. Bush's election and after 9/11, Beltway conservatives flip-flopped: deficits were no longer a problem, the so-called War on Terror trumped privacy, and unnecessary military adventurism became wars vital to national security.

Some amount of bipartisan hypocrisy has always existed, of course. When a party is out of power, it tends to be more critical, and many of the same Democrats who yowled about civil liberties under Bush have been muted about the Obama administration's even more disturbing claims of police powers.

Still, political parties should stand for something. Two of the Republican Party's best lines have been its claims to stand for lower taxes and limited government -- never mind that wars are expensive and will be paid for by higher taxes, higher borrowing, or higher inflation. The 2008 Republican Party Platform looks positively embarrassing today; it says: "We do not support government bailouts of private institutions. Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself."

Last week's Tea Parties were a welcome conservative protest against bailouts and government spending run amok. But the lack of conservative protests against Mr. Bush's own bailouts-and-spending-run-amok policies over the last eight years lends the Tax Day rallies an unfortunate partisan overtone. (It was the libertarians who remained, for the most part, true to their principles.)
Not until the Republican Party can admit that Mr. Bush was no conservative, and distances itself from his more unfortunate policies, will it be able to regain its footing and offer an alternative to the Democrats. The time for this is now: the midterm elections are not that far away.

---

I encourage you to bookmark the home page for my Other People's Money column. An RSS feed is available too. If you have questions, feedback, or suggestions, please feel free to e-mail me at [e-mail].

---

Declan McCullagh is the chief political correspondent for CNET and a CBS News EconWatch contributor. Previously, he was Wired's Washington bureau chief and a reporter for Time.com and Time magazine in Washington, D.C. He has taught journalism, public policy, and First Amendment law. He is an occasional programmer, avid analog and digital photographer, and lives with his wife in the San Francisco Bay area.

[TXcardplayer]

With so much bashing its hard to know whether its worth commenting - but any one who thinks what the Present Admin. and Leaders are doing is Right (correct} are Nuts - the path is clear - SPEND SPEND TAX TAX ....TOTAL CAMPAIGN LIES AND AGENDA .. it is clear on so many levels California is the most liberal state with so many "entitleme t" programs that it just IMPLODED - are you wanting the entire country to follow ? The Crap and Trade (yes i meant CRAP) is so full of B.S. AND LIES AND IS NO MORE THAN WHAT AL GORE -CALLED BTU TAX - YRS AGO -Wake-Up- the Green Effect is one thing GREEN FOR CONGRESS IN OUR TAX DOLLARS AND GREEN $$$ FOR AL GORE & HIS BUDS IN THE GREEN BIZ. WHAT A HOAX...THEN IF THAT ISN'T ENOUGH THEY WANT OT CRAM HEALTH INS. - Well i have Health Ins. i Buy it - my Wifes Co. pays for it why do i need to have CHANGE TO WHAT IS ALREADY WORKING-

[Onyx719]

Of course they have lost their way. They have too many racist undermining the party. These so-called "Tea Parties" are nothing more than a modern day Klan rally for SOME of them. Hanging on every word that racist idiot Rush Limbaugh says is also a MINUS...and they just don't know it.

[hwy71so]

Didn't take more the two or three paragraphs for the author to blame the TEA parties on President Bush.

Dude, Bush is GONE. Get over it. Bush bailed with billions. Obama bailed with TRILLIONS!!!

BOTH did WRONG.

Maybe y'all can answer me this. WHY are union auto workers making 70 dollars and HOUR? Just to turn a ratchet..... Police officers make less than 3,000 a month in most towns/cities and a wrench jockey makes 70 dollars an hour?

You want bail out? Dissolve the UAW.

[jxknowles]

The tea bagger protests were a sham, save for the Libertarians who have religiously protested on Tax Day every year. The ovine GOP protestors, spoon fed propaganda by FOX Noise and right-wing rant radio, did not have a clue to who, what or why they were protesting. This is the same crowd that couldn't figure out why McCain lost in landslide in November. I pity the unemployed, racist, fool that carries a sign that reads "I am not your ATM".

[taxguydave]

"No they don't like what Bush did, but Obama is even worse. He has magnified our debt 100-fold"--posted by Lnic27

Why, that sneaky Obama...you mean he spent $1quadrillion in the last 90 days when I wasn't looking?

[jd2408]

As an Independent that has voted Republican in the past I have never seen the Republican party behave as it has during their campaigns and after the election. These people are beginning to scare me. I believe the Tea Party was a good way of getting involved and expressing their beliefs but some of the signs and behavior were almost mob like. That bothers me. Their campaigns were even worse. Many have written that the Republican party has become a "fringe" party. I hope this isn't true. We need a strong two party system in our country.

[Lnic27]

The only reason the Republicans have lost their way is because they oppose the Democrats. And so help me if I hear one more claim about being racist just because I didn't vote for Obama, I'll explode. These Tea Parties have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Republicans. These were ordinary Americans that organized ALL OF THEM. They don't like the direction this country is headed. No they don't like what Bush did, but Obama is even worse. He has magnified our debt 100-fold, he is dropping our defenses and making us more vulnerable to a terriorist attack which some of you will have the luxury of blaming the Republicans for, and he's going around firing the CEOs of private companies. In short Obama is taking this beyond the extreme. And as for Freddie and Fannie it was George Bush who actually tried to REFORM Freddie and Fannie warning against consequences like this. Why did he fail? Because DEMOCRATS though being a minority in Congress at the time were able to filibuster away Bush's reform attempt. And why would they do this? So people like Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd, and yes even Obama could get their juicy Kickbacks.

These Americans are SICK AND TIRED of being robbed blind in broad daylight of their liberties and raping and pillaging of the greatness of this country that the Democrats are conducting, and THAT is what these Tea Parties are about. You guys need to take your heads out of your butts and realize this.

[comfortmd1]

funny thing is, bush and his republicons were responsible for the tarp mess and for running up 90 percent of national debt. in fact, he turned a surplus into a multiple trillion dolar loss.

[guitpic1]

The closest analogy to the TEA party protests is this for me:

It's like folks watching a house simmering and smolding from yrs...2000-2008(no TEA party to be found).

The house catches fire big time in 2007-2008(no TEA party to be found)

In comes the TEA party to protest how much water is being used to put out the fires.

i.e.

"You can't use that much water to put out the fires...our children and grandchildren will have to live without the water reserves...."

TEA party....

Where were you 2000-2008 when the fire was smoldering?

[notfooledtx]

Regarding the tea parties and why those on the right were mute on the same issues relating to Bush... There is a portion of the population of this country that is unable and unwilling to accept a black man leading this country. Claim racism or call me whatever you want, but it's obvious. How diverse were the crowds at the tea parties? Did you see anything but caucasions in attendance. (I didn't) Enough said.

[BenO152]

"Reagan's commitment to "trickle-down" (which Bush Sr. called "voodoo economics") was responsible for the beginning of the severe increase in income disparity in this country over the past 3 decades. So much for your claim that those years were "economically fantastic for everyone in the US". And his call for deregulation sowed the seeds of the current financial crisis.

Furthermore the 1981-1982 recession was the worst since the Depression until now. The unemployment rate remained above 8.1% for 26 consecutive months during his presidency and peaked at 10.8% in late 1982.

The S&L crisis, further fueled by deregulation, was responsible for the loss of roughly $43 billion in assets and was the precursor, the proverbial "canary in the coal mine" for our current financial issues.

As to popularity, Reagan's approval rating fell to 35% by January 1983 due to the recession. although it rebounded before the 1984 general election." - Posted by democracy1

Democracy1, the economic climate that lead to the recession of the early 80s began in the late 70s under Cater and it took Reagan a few years to combat the insane (beyond 13%) inflation that the Carter administration caused, and to reel in some of the crazy government spending. Once he was able to reverse what Cater had done the unemployment rate fell like a stone and inflation was brought under control. Look at the last 6 years of Reagan's presidency, look at the unemployment rate, look at the average wage (compared to Cater's term), and look at the overall welfare of the nation during his administration. You don't win 49 states in re-election because the nation is unhappy, unemployed, underpaid, or unsafe. You get those kinds of numbers when things are (yes, I'll use the word again) fantastic!

There are many similarities between Cater and Obama. Both were elected after horribly unpopular administrations (Nixon & Bush) both were hugely popular when they took office, both took on "borrow and spend" policies (though as bad as Cater was, he didn't come close to what Obama is doing). Cater's popularity waned quickly, as Obama's is doing. Obama's approval rating (which is admittedly still not bad) has fallen faster than any other president in history.

Your argument against the popularity of Reagan is a short lived dip two years into his first term? He won re-election winning 49 states, that is unheard of before or since. He also had one of the highest approval ratings of any exiting President, although the Iran Contra Scandal did tarnish his numbers a bit at the end.

It is time for a true conservative again! Cater led to Reagan... hopefully Obama and his crazy spending policies will have a similar effect and lead to another such leader.

[toldyouso29]

And to all the posts that keep saying that the "problem" with the Tea Parties is that the same complaints could be said about Bush: The same complaints ARE being said about Bush. That?s the whole point of the Tea Parties, the CITIZENS need to take their country back from government (both parties!).
Posted by BenO152 at 7:47 AM : Apr 23, 2009


Republicans face wholesale scorn for the tea parties--because they are attempting revolt, just about the timr, their guy is no longer in power. /the contempt for any republican revolting against Bush is all in the timing--where was the revolt when Bush was in power and turning us into Little concentration, torture, high inflation, spy on your neighbor for the fatherland kind of country?

face it--the timing is suspect, reeks of sour grapes and power deficits and most of us--whether we agree with Obama or not--do NOT want to be a part of such obvious two faced, partisan hypocrisy.

[toldyouso29]

Strange, isn't it how we'd never do that with our own money but far nothing when we do it with someone else's. Moral: "You don't spend your way our of debt."
Posted by YouCantBSirius at 3:55 AM : Apr 23, 2009


Hmmmm... and where were your comments and insight when you learned we were to continue to spend 300 million to 500 million dollars a DAY AND kill people--in a war based on and defended with LIES?

If it was wrong to try the "spend your way out of debt with Obama (and it is) it was also wrong when Bush did it.

The fact is--that we are at that strange place spendaholics go to--when they know that they are already sinking, so they just pull out all of the stops and try to go out with a bang.

I bet if you follow the money trails, very few in Congress or government will not become substantially richer, while our country goes to pot. It is the American way: Most Congressmen are lawyers and/or business men--and with bith groups: "THE CREED IS GREED"

[taxguydave]

We are still living under the Bush budget and tax laws. Obama has yet to sign a budget or tax bill.

Reagan nearly doubled the payroll tax, which everybody who works pays. In fact, the tax gap between the rich and poor changes dramatically changes when you include the payroll tax (which many of the wealthy don't pay at all).

As far as the income tax goes, the percentage of US adults who pay no income tax at all is about 17%--http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/index.html--not 43% or 50% or some other such number that some libertarian or republican pulled out of their ass.

[hdc77494]

While you are correct that Bush ran deficits during his administration, they were nothing like what we are seeing today. The Tea parties weren't just about government bailouts, but the radical expansion of social spending programs and the acceleration of redistribution, mostly designed to curry favor with possible dem voting blocks. While Bush spent on wars and the aftermath of 9-11, Obama spends on welfare programs. The 50% of people actually paying taxes are fed up that Congress and the President do not appear to be listening to their constituents whatsoever. As far as bailouts, there is a difference between adding capital to private companies, and actually taking them over and running them. Mr Obama has no experience even running a newspaper stand, has never met a payroll, and specifically avoided hiring any business leaders for his administration. I don't think that's change even the moderate swing voters believe in.

[democracy1]

The republicans are moralistic and optimistic achievers, something the liberals hate.
Posted by goodusa at 5:37 PM : Apr 23, 2009

Yeah, riiiiiight!!!!!!! lol

[democracy1]

You don't know your history Strangeworld. While I agree that Bush screwed this country (and now Obama is screwing it even more) the Reagan years were economically fantastic for everyone in the US. Do a little research, incredibly low unemployment, rising wages, rising standard of living, hugely popular president (won 49 states when re-elected), and the longest stretch of peace time prosperity in our nation's history. Reagan was the last time the Republican party was truly represented. I've been disgruntled since... but I have hope that there is so much anger about where the country has gone and is now going even faster (insane spending, insane borrowing, insane deficits) that the CITIZENS will take back their country from the idiots that have been and are now running things. Regardless of ideology about taxes or social issues, what is happening now should worry and anger everyone.
Posted by BenO152 at 1:23 PM : Apr 23, 2009

I suggest you do a little homework yourself.

Reagan's commitment to "trickle-down" (which Bush Sr. called "voodoo economics") was responsible for the beginning of the severe increase in income disparity in this country over the past 3 decades. So much for your claim that those years were "economically fantastic for everyone in the US". And his call for deregulation sowed the seeds of the current financial crisis.

Furthermore the 1981-1982 recession was the worst since the Depression until now. The unemployment rate remained above 8.1% for 26 consecutive months during his presidency and peaked at 10.8% in late 1982.

The S&L crisis, further fueled by deregulation, was responsible for the loss of roughly $43 billion in assets and was the precursor, the proverbial "canary in the coal mine" for our current financial issues.

As to popularity, Reagan's approval rating fell to 35% by January 1983 due to the recession. although it rebounded before the 1984 general election.

[johnb8888]

There never has been a Repig that at heart is any different from the Bushits, since Barry Goldwater anyway. This is one of the lies promoted by the mouthpieces for the Rupert Murdochs. Reagan sure was of the same kind as the Bushits, plenty money for his Billionaire pals, at everyone else's expenses.

And McCullogh is just another ho for the Tighty Whitey Righty crowd.

[BenO152]

"when Reagan got elected, the GOP took it on themselves to dismantle the middle class and redistribute the wealth to those few percent of the population who were GOP friends, business associates, and large campaign donors." - Posted by strangeworld

You don't know your history Strangeworld. While I agree that Bush screwed this country (and now Obama is screwing it even more) the Reagan years were economically fantastic for everyone in the US. Do a little research, incredibly low unemployment, rising wages, rising standard of living, hugely popular president (won 49 states when re-elected), and the longest stretch of peace time prosperity in our nation's history. Reagan was the last time the Republican party was truly represented. I've been disgruntled since... but I have hope that there is so much anger about where the country has gone and is now going even faster (insane spending, insane borrowing, insane deficits) that the CITIZENS will take back their country from the idiots that have been and are now running things. Regardless of ideology about taxes or social issues, what is happening now should worry and anger everyone.

[skyk-2009]

President Soros is running things now.
Posted by mav547166 at 11:03 AM : Apr 23, 2009

I rest my case!! When people with THIS intelligence is the face of your party, you have a very LARGE problem.