Okay, I’ve had it: Bush the Neoliberal by Richard Cohen.

Years ago, someone coined the term “neoliberal.” I was never sure what it meant, and it has since fallen into disuse, but whatever the case, I’d like to revive (and mangle) the term and apply it — brace yourself — to George W. Bush. He’s more liberal than you might think…

But consider this: An overriding principle of conservatism is to limit the role and influence of the federal government. Nowhere is this truer than in education. For instance, there was a time when no group of Republicans could convene without passing a resolution calling for the abolition of the Education Department and turning the building — I am extrapolating here — into a museum of creationism.

Now, though, not only are such calls no longer heard, but Bush has extended the department’s reach in a manner that Democrats could not have envisaged. I am referring, of course, to the 2001 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, better known as No Child Left Behind. I will spare you the act’s details, but it pretty much tells the states to shape up or face a loss of federal funds. It is precisely the sort of law that conservatives predicted Washington would someday seek — and it did.

Similarly, let’s take a look at the much-mocked notion of diversity. Bill Clinton was widely berated for his effort to have an administration that looked like America — women, African Americans, Hispanics, you name it. Whether by design or not, Bush has also managed that feat. A female education secretary is one thing, but a national security adviser — the uber-macho post — is something else, and that went first to Condi Rice. And over at Justice, Bush chose Alberto Gonzales, the son of Hispanic migrant workers and, incidentally, a lawyer with the singular gift of forgetting meetings he attended. (In private practice, did he forget to bill?)

I am not suggesting that any of these appointees — including Bush’s former White House counsel, Harriet Miers — are what is pejoratively known as affirmative action hires. I am suggesting, though, that Bush has not only diversified his Cabinet and staff but obviously got enormous satisfaction in doing so. You only have to listen to Bush talk about the virtues of immigration — another liberal sentiment — or his frequent mention of the “soft bigotry of low expectations” to appreciate that the president is a sentimental softie, what was once dismissively called a “mushy-headed liberal.”

For those wondering what neoliberalism exactly is, I suggest reading this. The Wikipedia entry in Dutch, rightfully identifies Thatcher and Reagan, among others, as neoliberals.

One could also, however, call Bush a neoconservative. I wrote an essay about this very subject: is George W. Bush America’s first neoconservative president or not? In the essay I argue that he is. He shows all the signs, so to speak. He invested in education, he came up with the Bush doctrine, he talks about moral values a lot, he fully supports Israel: yes, he’s a neocon.

To put an end to the confusion, I suggest calling George W. Bush a neolibercon.