Like father, not like son.

[MM38084]

Like father, not like son.

George H.W. Bush was a success in foreign policy and a failure in domestic policy -- and was a one-termer. The economic policy of his son, George W. Bush, has brought a boom, while his Iraq policy has brought a debacle. The voters will have to sort it all out.

The elder Bush was successful in international relations. He learned the importance of maintaining the NATO alliance. Another lesson was cooperating with the United Nations.

The result was a grand alliance against Saddam Hussein in 1991, including Arab neighbors. When the war was won, some argued that America should keep going all the way to Baghdad. But Bush refused, because he had learned the lesson about the extreme difficulty of prolonged occupation of other countries.

Yet Bush was persuaded to break his no-new-taxes pledge. He shattered his political coalition, deepened a recession and increased the deficit.

Eight years later, the younger Bush came into office promising a tax-cutting economic agenda. That rate-reduction plan was enacted in mid-2001; since then, despite terrorism, war and corporate scandals, the economy has rocked on. The growth rate for the third quarter was 7.2 percent.

Yet the younger Bush has veered from the tried-and-true on foreign policy. After September 11, he correctly destroyed al-Qaida in Afghanistan. But then he ruined alliances, created new enemies with reckless rhetoric and plunged into the quagmire of Iraq.

Thus the paradox of the Bushes: They can get it right, but only half-right.



Bush split


George H.W. Bush

* He raised taxes.

* He worked with United Nations.

* He didn't occupy Iraq.

George W. Bush

* He passed tax cuts.

* He avoided working with United Nations.

* He occupied Iraq.