“My government’s schwartz is larger than yours!”

Volokh friend David Bernstein discusses polar hatred against the current president:

Nothing frustrates ideologues on one side of the political aisle more than when it turns out that their political opponent is not an ideologue, but an opportunist, (or perhaps simply a typical politician with moderately conservative or liberal leanings). The same was true with conservatives and Bill Clinton, whom conservatives just knew was a die-hard ultra-liberal, but who was perfectly willing to end the welfare entitlement when it became politically convenient to do so (and who knows, he may have thought it was a not-so-bad idea). And indeed, conservatives would have had far more respect for a Bill Clinton who had governed as a McGovernite, and liberals would have more respect for Bush if he governed as a Goldwaterite, because then they would be acting according to what their opponents perceive to be their “true” iedological beliefs.

He also notes this Christian Science Monitor article about the big spending the Bush administration is doing. Now, wouldn’t we all want to have a little less government? Wouldn’t we all want a little less spending, us economic conservatives? Wouldn’t we all want someone we don’t have to call RINO everytime there is a decision we don’t like?

Shyeah right. Dean Esmay tries to put things in perspective by saying that it is a matter of political power play, which really is the way the game is played. Now, for all the RINO-riders out there, let’s just try to keep in mind how electable their Ideal Republican would be once he goes out into the jungle of Moderate Voters. Not yet, until the jungle creeps toward the Republican tent a little bit more.

As for noting that the Dems are still assailing Bush on his extravagant domestic decisions, here’s the matter with them: it’s not enough. It’s never going to be enough, and one reason for that is because it is Bush who is doing the proposing.

Consider John Cole’s consideration of the Pelosi Immigration Plan, which is far, far worse than what Bush has asked for. He presents two scenarios, but I’d like to consider the second. He says:

There is a possibility that the hard left in Congress, led by Pelosi and Daschle, simply hate Bush so much that they created this short-sighted proposal just to have another opportunity to attack Bush and to do a little recreational race-baiting. If so, then they have cut off their collective noses to spite their faces.

Bush’s main problem on his immigration policy proposal was not that the center rejected it- it seemed to play fairly well with moderate to conservative Democrats, moderate Republicans and Independents were either sympathetic or agnostic. The people who were pissed were Bush’s base- social conservatives and the far right. It would seem to me that the last thing that the Democrats would want to do when Bush is proposing centrist policies is to propose a counter policy which is going to alienate their moderates while proving to Bush’s base that not voting for Bush could have far worse ramifications if the Democrats have their way. IN other words, unless I am reading this wrong, this proposal will do nothing but help Bush- it really does make him look like a moderate to both the centrist Democrats and Republicans and to the social conservatives.

Exactly, which is why when we worry about just how large the Bush government’s schwartz is, let us try to keep in mind how much larger a Dem government’s schwartz would be. Then we can all shudder silently and either vote for a Republican, or in non-voting people like myself, ask everyone they know of voting age to go ahead and do so.