Eleanor Clift: Bush "paying political price for refusing to reach out"

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9086943/site/newsweek/

Aug. 26, 2005 - So President Bush wakes up one morning and says to himself: “Let’s go to Idaho!” The destination is his answer to a question that’s been dogging him determinedly throughout his Texas vacation: “I’m approaching the 30s in popularity polls, what to do?” It all reminds of the “Carnac the Magnificent” routine Johnny Carson used to do on the “Tonight Show.” After Ed McMahon announced the answer in a sealed envelope, Carson, dressed like a fortune teller, would tap the side of his head and reveal the question. It was a hilarious comedy bit, and when Bush’s father was president, the senior Bush got rave reviews for a speech to the Gridiron Club in which he played Carnac with his press secretary as his sidekick.

Bush wasn’t looking for laughs when he focused on Idaho as a travel destination. Idaho has sent more National Guardsmen to Iraq than any other state; it is also one of the most reliably red regions in the country. With his mountain bike safely aboard Air Force One, Bush could leave Texas and still feel secure. It’s the nature of this brash and impetuous president that when it comes to words, he’s a big shot, but he ducks any situation where he might have to face anyone hostile to him or his policies. In Idaho, Bush could head straight to his comfort zone, an audience of rock-solid Republicans with potential dissenters screened out. This is a president who has refused to reach out to opponents in any way, and he’s paying a political price for it.

Congress was anticipating a huge confrontation over Bush’s first Supreme Court nomination, but now that’s been completely overshadowed by the war. When the politicians return from their summer recess after Labor Day, they’re going to find pressure building for a serious debate about America’s role in Iraq. It is the issue that is dominating American thought, and with gas prices ready to spike over $3.00, consumers are feeling the pinch of the war in a way they didn’t when somebody else’s son and daughter did the fighting and Bush gave them a tax cut.



"U.S. President George W. Bush makes a statement to the media at his ranch where he is vacationing in Crawford, Texas August 28, 2005. Bush on Sunday touted the merits of Iraq's new constitution but acknowledged Sunni opposition and that an upcoming referendum could spark a new wave of violence. REUTERS/Jeff Mitchell"

[democrat in Tallahassee]

1. nice tan, asshole

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

6. I think he looks like hell...worse than usual, even with the tan. That

Spot over his eye is more pronounced, as well.

MKJ

[calimary]

8. That's okay. Hopefully he's too "macho" to use sunscreen.

Tan or no, he looks pathetic. Might as well try putting lipstick on him. He's still a pig.

[win_in_06]

2. Help me out here please. What is the effect of a low approval

rating on a President who is not concerned about being reelected?

I don't see him changing his ways now based on ratings.

[safi0]

4. It may not have

A lot of effect on him per se, but with the system we have in this country the President can't do anything without the approval of Congress. As his numbers continue to slide some Republicans in Congress especially the House may try to distnace themsevles from him because of fear of there own re-election.

[calimary]

9. Yep - that's the ticket. They are ALL vulnerable.

As long as they hitch their wagons to him, they're hitching their wagons to a rock (Iraq?). We need to make sure they're duct-taped, epoxied, and laminated to him and EVERY shitty policy he's brought forth. ESPECIALLY the war.

And about that tax cut that hasn't done squat to offset rising gasoline prices, I like putting the question out there: "Say, how's that dollar-ninety-eight tax cut workin' out for ya, 'eh?"

[AX10]

20. True and Bush's agenda will be crippled like das Bismarck.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

12. The effect is that no one wants to hitch a ride on his star...

With 2006 elections (and 2008 Presidential elections) on the horizon, NO Republican will want to declare loyalty to Bush. They'll do it in a "good for the party" kind of way, but the days of the John McCain big sweaty closed-eyed dreamy hug?

Gone, for the most part.

The effect is also that Bush's "agenda" gets harder to push through. You've already seen how "successful" his Social Security scheme has been. He had to recess-appoint Bolton. And on September 30th, his "Tax Advisory Panel" turns in their "recommendations," One of them will be the "National Sales Tax," now going by the name of "The Fair Tax." You can read this article by Bruce Bartlett:

http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20050802-093835-4780r.htm

...who says that "big reform" is wishful thinking on Bush's part.

So Bush's concern (or lack of concern) over low ratings is irrelevant. It's going to become a lot more difficult for him to accomplish anything. That's good enough for me.

[win_in_06]

14. Good point about the lack of success with SS reform

In some paliamentary systems a colossal flop like that would lead to immediate elections.

[blue sky at night]

3. think I will burn every red tie I own..........

are these idiots ever allowed by their moms to wear anything but blue suits and red ties...........

[achtung_circus]

5. This slays me.

The question as we move toward the fourth anniversary of September 11 is why we haven’t been hit at home. Either we’ve been very effective, or very lucky, or a combination of both.

The US has not been hit because there has been no reason to do so. The US is ripping itself apart and doesn't need the catalyst of terror, yet.

Al Qaeda is not stupid. They will not expend resources they don't need to expend.

The many opportunities have been squandered by a president who "doesn't do foreign policy" and his band of sycophants/controllers.

[wli]

10. eh? al Qaeda is a CIA operation to begin with n/t

[achtung_circus]

13. A long time ago.

I don't believe that they, or any of their spin-offs, are currently following anyone else's best interests but their own.

AlQaeda was willing to use the CIA as a source of weapons and funds and the US was willing to use Al Qaeda to piss on the USSR.

[wli]

15. the timing of al Qaeda statements & attacks is far too "convenient"

I don't believe for a minute they aren't working for Bushler/Cheney/etc.

[achtung_circus]

16. Okay, but consider

Al Qaeda's a name I will use even though I believe it is mostly supplanted by other groups now.

However, it is in their best interest to have B* react just the way he reflexively acts. If they can make him act in ways that will further their purpose, to encourage the Islamist rebellion they have been pushing, unsuccessfully until 2001, they will so act.

If he acts that way because he is a numb nuts, they will not expend the resources. They'll just sit back and laugh that Allah or God or the Universe has blessed them with an antagonist who seems to have NO nuance.

THAT strikes me as a simpler solution, a least hypothesis.

[wli]

18. Occam's razor argues against an independent al Qaeda

Al Qaeda is a new actor, an extra object. The simplest explanation is that they are literally a subsidiary of or front for a preexisting power. Which one is indicated by who benefits. Open and shut case.

[achtung_circus]

21. So a conspiracy involving who-knows-how-many people

is simpler that a small group of people acting, as people are wont to do, in their own perceived best interest?

Nothing in the actions of Islamists requires outside encouragement. They have always been a small group with simple objectives. Small, that is, until an unuanced American foreign policy played into their hands and generated the current groundswell.

Your conspiracy is an unneccessary complication.

Case closed.

[Kagemusha]

17. It shouldn't be any secret Al Qaeda's targeting US allies

Worried about splitting the coalition, not giving the US more sympathy.

[Cha]

7. "Let's go to Idaho!"

:silly:

[gratuitous]

11. Thanks Eleanor; why hasn't he paid a price up till now?

Could it be . . . the media refusing to report on dissent?

Bush has famously ignored anyone who disagrees with him, even mildly, yet the media have gone along for years with that "uniter, not a divider" nonsense. They've kept a tight focus on Bush and his cronies, never letting the pretty picture be spoiled by anyone at variance with the lock-step.

Now Lil George is finally getting a bit of negative publicity, and his poll numbers plummet. Yet the Mighty Republican Wurlitzer keeps wheezing away, puffing Bush for all it's worth. What if the popular media just reported Bush and his antics straight, without the noise machine in the background? He'd probably long for the days of a 40% approval rating.

[Marymarg]

19. His asymmetrical face

I am so struck by the asymmetry of his face. Cover up one side at a time and you see such different emotions being shown.

Which side shows his true feelings?

[tinfoilinfor2005]

22. I've got a better idea...

cover up the whole damn thing. Ick.