Bush's Shifting Ideology

Longtime conservative activist Richard A. Viguerie argues that Bush moved away from conservative principles long ago, saying the president did not fight hard enough to limit the growth of government and defend conservative social positions, such as opposition to same-sex marriage. "He did betray us, just like his father did," said Viguerie, who has written a book that sharply criticizes the current president's tenure. "He promised he would govern like a conservative, and it just hasn't been the case."

Few outside analysts disagree that Bush moved to the center, especially after Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006, much as Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton did after they confronted political setbacks. The changes are reflected in an overhaul of personnel at key Cabinet agencies, particularly State, Defense and the Treasury, where secretaries pursued -- or were allowed to pursue -- much more pragmatic policies than their predecessors.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, for instance, has tried to restart a Middle East peace process that had been largely abandoned in the first term, and she was given more flexibility by Bush to pursue a diplomatic deal with North Korea over its nuclear weapons program.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has been open to different approaches on Iraq and sought to defuse the tensions between civilian leaders and uniformed officers that endured at the Pentagon under his predecessor, Donald H. Rumsfeld.

The change was also pronounced at Treasury, where Paulson was delegated extensive powers over economic decision-making and has used them in a wide-ranging effort to avert economic collapse. Along with other top economic officials, he has led the takeovers of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and American International Group -- and an emerging plan for the government to take hundreds of billions of dollars in distressed mortgages and other assets off the hands of banks and other financial institutions.

"What's going on is learning -- it does happen in the light of the experience," said John Lewis Gaddis, a diplomatic historian at Yale University who has been friendly to the administration. "I think the second term is quite different than the first term, particularly in foreign policy and now it is happening on the economy. . . . There is a far greater degree of pragmatism and less ideological rigidity."

In a roundtable interview with White House reporters yesterday, national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley took issue with this sentiment, saying basic elements of Bush foreign policy remain in place -- such as an aggressive effort to fight terrorism -- even while circumstances have changed over the course of the administration. "The basic principles are the same, the fundamental approach is the same, but we have tried to be flexible and entrepreneurial and creative about how we carry out those policies," Hadley said. "We've tried to learn as we've gone forward in this situation."

"I see a lot more continuity, certainly in terms of who this president is, what he stands for, what his values and principles are," Hadley said. "I mean, I think you've heard him, you've been listening to his speeches over the last eight years. This is a man who is remarkably unaffected by eight years as president, in terms of who he is, what he stands for, how he thinks of himself."