Sun Sentinel Broward Edition

George H.W. Bush and the last gasp of moderation

- By Doyle McManus

George H.W. Bush, who lived a long life of public service, embodied a lost virtue in American politics: the idea of restraint. Bush was a man of modest goals whose often-ridiculed lodestar was prudence, the determinat­ion not to make things worse.

Moderation was part of his appeal, and it helped the former congressma­n, diplomat, CIA director and Reagan vice president to win the presidenti­al election of 1988. But it was also clearly one of his flaws, and in 1992, it pushed him toward defeat.

The lesson to most of his successors, including his own son, was unfortunat­e: Restraint and moderation are for losers.

As soon as news broke Friday of Bush’s death, he began to be eulogized for his patrician, almost quaint manners; his reluctance to talk about himself (he is the only modern president who didn’t write a post-White House memoir); his personal courtesy to opponents; his blizzards of thank-you notes. (He would have been lost as president in the age of Twitter wars.) But his devotion to restraint went well beyond manners.

Bush was a conservati­ve but never a zealot. “I’m not a nut about it,” he said in a 1984 television interview. The remark didn’t endear him to the Republican Party’s true believers, who understood correctly that he was talking about them.

“There’s something terrible about those who carry it” — conservati­sm — “to extremes. They’re scary,” he wrote in his diary in 1988, in a passage cited by his biographer, Jon Meacham. “They will destroy this party if they’re permitted to take over.”

His domestic policies were the opposite of revolution­ary.

“I want a kinder, gentler nation,” he said when he won the 1988 Republican presidenti­al nomination, a goal that sounds impossibly naive today.

His willingnes­s to negotiate in reasonably good faith with the opposition allowed him to pass more bipartisan legislatio­n than is often remembered, including the Americans With Disabiliti­es Act and an important updating of the Clean Air Act. The recent federal report warning that climate change will damage the economy was a product of legislatio­n Bush helped pass.

Bush’s most famous bipartisan compromise, of course, was one that got him into trouble: the 1990 budget deal in which he agreed to raise taxes to help shrink the federal deficit, a betrayal of his “read my lips” campaign promise. Hard-liners on the right considered it treachery. Newt Gingrich, then a junior member of the House from Georgia, led a congressio­nal rebellion against the deal made by his own party’s president — a foretaste of future polarizati­on.

Foreign policy was Bush’s greatest love, and the arena where restraint — prudence — delivered the best results. When the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, Bush refused his political aides’ urgings that he celebrate the event, much less declare U.S. victory in the Cold War. “I’m not going to dance on the wall,” he told them. To Bush, it was far more important that the loser in the struggle, Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev, emerge with his dignity intact and work with the United States to make the outcome peaceful.

The collapse of communist government­s in Eastern Europe could easily have touched off chaos and wars. Thanks in great part to Bush, it was mostly peaceful — a genuinely historic achievemen­t.

Bush went to war with Iraq after Saddam Hussein’s army pushed its way into Kuwait in 1991. When U.S. troops routed the Iraqi army, hawks in Washington urged Bush to keep the fight going, to march on to Baghdad and overthrow the dictator. He refused. Two decades later, his son President George W. Bush, tried the opposite approach. The younger Bush not only toppled Saddam, but he declared that he would also make Iraq a democratic model for the rest of the Arab world. That experiment in unrestrain­t did not end well.

The elder Bush was not mild in all things. In political campaigns, while polite on the surface, he authorized savage attacks on his opponents, most memorably the “Willie Horton” commercial that accused Democratic candidate Michael Dukakis of letting a black criminal run free. But he didn’t govern savagely. It was as if Bush considered campaigns as warfare, but genuine bipartisan compromise as essential to getting anything done.

A few years ago, George W. Bush praised his father as “one of the greatest one-term presidents in the nation’s history.” He meant it as a compliment; he was defending his father as a man whose achievemen­ts had been undervalue­d.

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States