In Washington, Republicans receive praise only in eulogies

OPINION:

No modern president was more unfairly treated by critics than George H. W. Bush. Sadly, last week’s memorializing reminds America: In Washington, Republicans receive praise only in eulogies. For President George H.W. Bush, and America, it comes 26 years too late.

George H.W. Bush was self-effacing to a fault. For the nation he served so well and so long, it was also tragic. His humility left him open to attacks that should never have been made or allowed to stand. Once Lee Atwater, his alter ego — if not his id — passed, no one remained to parry them.

His critics called him aloof. Yet few could match his graciousness. It manifested itself in countless ways. The legendary number of notes he diligently dashed off, to virtually everyone associated with any of his endeavors, was only the most obvious.

He was lambasted for federal deficits in 1990. He demurred defending them — even the defensible dollars spent on national defense. These had resulted in the Berlin Wall falling the previous year, and would result in the Soviet Union collapsing the next. America’s Cold War adversary, the world’s biggest threat to peace, was defeated without shot fired or life lost.

He could have pointed out, that from 1980 to 1990, real defense spending (according to the Office of Management and Budget’s Historical Tables, in billions of constant 2009 dollars) increased from $361 billion to $512 billion — a $151 billion real increase. During that same period, nondefense spending rose from $1.134 trillion to $1.497 trillion — a $363 billion increase. The deficit driver was not well-spent defense dollars, but the rest of the budget, which the Democratic Congress refused to cut.

They would drive him to break his “no new taxes” pledge in 1990 — not out of sound budget policy — where social spending still remains the nation’s biggest and real fiscal threat — but political retribution. Of course, it cost him dearly politically, and of course he knew it would; however, his first duty was leading the nation, not his Party.

Once done, his critics gave him no recognition for this.Attacked for deficits, once he succumbed to address them, they ignored it.

Nor in retrospect, did he receive his deserved recognition for assembling the global coalition to liberate Kuwait. It was nothing short of masterful — a feat only reinforced by the failure of any world leader since to do likewise on such a scale.

As commander in chief, his handling of the situation was no less remarkable. Tasked with liberating a country occupied by one of the world’s largest armies, actual ground fighting lasted just 100 hours. American casualties were as small, as the war was brief.

The unkindest cut was also the unfairest. Somehow, a man who as president accomplished an amazing wartime triumph, and as barely more than a boy, volunteered and served as a decorated Navy pilot in WWII, was labeled with “wimp.”

Ironically, the man who ousted him from the White House was far closer to the cartoon figure Mr. Bush’s critics sketched of him.

Where Mr. Bush entered military service voluntarily, Bill Clinton avoided it meticulously. Where Mr. Bush had been forced into raising taxes, Mr. Clinton did so eagerly — only to renounce them when the going got tough afterwards. Where Mr. Bush produced the Persian Gulf miracle, Mr. Clinton gave America

Where a Democratic Congress demanded higher spending of Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton benefitted from its reduction — led by the “peace dividend” that the Reagan-Bush defense buildup provided after communism’s collapse. By 1996. defense spending (in current dollars) had dropped to $400 billion, and thanks to a new Republican Congress, nondefense spending’s increase slowed to $1.692 trillion. The net effect was spending in real dollars grew by just $83 billion between 1990 and 1996.

Amazingly, where Mr. Bush’s real accomplishments were dismissed or largely ignored, Bill Clinton would reap accolades where his were few. Similarly overlooked in the Clinton history, is the reverse’s occurrence. Nowhere is this truer than in his contribution to coarsening American politics. Those lamenting the current climate would do well to remember its origin: In 1992, the heretofore unheard became acceptable, so long as it got and kept the Clintons in the White House.

There is a stench of self-absolution by many who in death now praise George H.W. Bush for the first time, but ignored or reviled him in life — especially that portion lived in the White House. In some cases, it amounts to mobsters sending flowers to the funeral of the rival boss they rubbed out. For far too many, it is apologizing, not eulogizing, that would be appropriate.

• J.T. Young served in the Office of Management and Budget and the Treasury Department.