In Britain, the Times proposed a do-nothing policy "until today's passion and polemics fade away."

He had earned Nixon's ire the year before when he criticized the administration's "do-nothing" policy toward inflation.

That approach resulted in a failed, do-nothing policy, which President Clinton finally abandoned.

The long-term consequences of the current do-nothing policy are easy to predict.

Washington's do-nothing policy extends also to concentration camps.

Bush's do-nothing policy on global warming began almost as soon as he took office.

The trouble is that the fig leaf Mr. Clinton has used to cover a do-nothing policy has vanished.

The Conservative Party was in power in England and apparently committed to a do-nothing policy.

I think by encouraging that kind of do-nothing policy both in Britain and in the United States, they did harm.

What of the costs of the present do-nothing policy?