Jed, as a follow up, this is classic Will
ambiguity:
But conservatives’ wholesome wariness of
presidential power has been a casualty of conservative presidents
winning seven of the last 10 elections.
George H.W. Bush and Richard Nixon, though very astute and worthy
presidents in their own right (again, forgiving their major
faults), haven’t the conservative mark in history — they were
moderates. I’m not interested in gauging presidential status on the
Conserv-O-Meter, but the argument Will is constructing here hinges
on the assumption that these “conservative” presidents really clung
to conservative principles, and as such really identified with the
conservative movements that put them in power. You may be able to
say that Nixon was, but only as an embattled president. Bush I is a
harder case.
Will would be wrong to say the conservative appetite for limited
government was sated by President Bush I’s tenure; it was his
trespass against his tax pledge that led to his downfall.
The only point that really kept me nodding was this line:
…The president’s decision to authorize NSA’s
surveillance without the complicity of a court or Congress was a
mistake. Perhaps one caused by this administration’s almost
metabolic urge to keep Congress unnecessarily distant and hence
disgruntled.
This argument could be completely divorced from it’s antecedent,
that we can safely assume Congress would have hopped along with
Bush’s request for the broader executive powers he acted on in
using the NSA. We can’t assume that, and we don’t have to. There
has been a very poor relationship between the President and his
party throughout his time in office, and the pressure Bush faces
now is no doubt a part of it. But whether Congress has a right to
be disgruntled is unknown — after all, Bush has yet to veto
anything put before him.