By Kevin D. Williamson
Thursday, September 03, 2015
If the 2016 presidential election ends up a contest
between 1992’s surnames — Bush vs. Clinton — we will have failed in some way as
a republic.
The case for Jeb Bush is not exactly clear, though he
enjoys an advantage vis-à-vis Mrs. Clinton in that the case against Herself is
as clear as can be: She’s inept and dishonest.
Bush was a good governor of Florida — a long time ago,
politically speaking. Things were different then: His time as governor
coincided with a real-estate bubble that relieved him and other Florida leaders
of the need to make a great many pressing financial decisions, and larger
decisions about the structure of government.
In that, he very much resembles the woman against whom he
presumably would be running: The Democratic heiress-apparent traffics
remorselessly in Nineties nostalgia, recalling those halcyon days when a decade
or so of private-sector investment in information technology suddenly collided
with this new thing called the web, producing a great explosion of wonder and
money. We Generation Xers are an inconsolable bunch of complainers, but if
there was a better year in American history to be finishing college than 1996,
I do not know what it was. But like the present-day Chinese economy of angst
and lore, the American dot-com boom was a combination of genuine economic
activity and bubblicious, politics-driven delusion. Indeed, it is a wonder that
there wasn’t a tulip-bulb startup with a trillion-dollar valuation.
It is in the nature of bubbles to burst. George W. Bush
et al. performed with no special distinction on economic and fiscal matters
during the turbulent post-Clinton period; and, if anything, the current
governor of Florida, Rick Scott, has a more impressive record in office than
his predecessor-once-removed did, all things considered. About the intervening
figure, the less said the better.
Bush is, of course, a heretic. There are those of us who
like a little heresy in our candidates, if only as evidence that they remain
capable of genuine thought, but Bush’s deviationism makes it rough going for
him both as a matter of substance and as a matter of pure politics. Apologetics
notwithstanding, Common Core is an undesirable outgrowth of the centralizing
and federalizing impulse in educational matters, and an occasionally nefarious
one at that. Bush’s softness on immigration suggests very strongly that he
would not be the sort of president who could be relied upon to implement the
robust measures that actually will be required to get control over our lawless
immigration practices. Bush is on the wrong side of these issues, and these
issues matter a great deal to the Republican primary electorate.
Bush argues — and it is an excellent argument — that a
governor’s record in office is a much better indication of what his performance
is likely to be as president than does, say, a volume of Senate speeches made
in an effectively consequence-free environment. That is a very compelling case
for rallying behind Rick Perry, which the Republican electorate does not seem
much inclined to do, or to fall in with Scott Walker or Bobby Jindal.
If we are looking for a compelling new policy idea, Bush
is not our man. (It isn’t clear who is.) If we are looking to radically change
the posture of the Republican party, then we might be inclined toward Senator
Rand Paul; but the Republican primary electorate is, at the moment,
zombie-walking in the opposite direction of Senator Paul’s libertarianism, as a
coalition of frustrated immigration reformers (hurray!), anti-trade autarkists
(boo!), and a small-but-larger-than-you’d-think group of very vocal white
nationalists (egad!) of the Le Pen school express their opposition to
insufficiently conservative Republican coastal elites by throwing in with a New
York City real-estate heir and lifelong progressive whose main political
activity thus far in his seven decades has been nurturing the careers of Chuck
Schumer and a certain Mrs. C.
If the best we can say for Bush is that the people who
dislike him most intensely exhibit a worrisome compound of rage and stupidity,
that’s not much of an endorsement, either.
Jeb Bush was a good governor in a different era. In this
era, he is a good man with his heart in the right place even when his head
isn’t, an unquestionably decent gentleman and an ornament to the Republican
party with no obvious reason to be its presidential nominee, much less
president of these United States.
No comments:
Post a Comment