2005: The Collapse of Bush's Authority

[kliljedahl]

by Immanuel Wallerstein
Released: 1 Jan 2006

Whatever one thinks of Bush's politics, there is no question that at the start of 2005 he had arrived at the pinnacle of his authority. Bush interpreted his reelection and the Republican majority in both houses of Congress as a mandate, not only validating his invasion of Iraq but authorizing his very conservative economic agenda -- renewal of the tax cuts, gutting the social security program, drilling for oil in Alaska and in general reducing environmental protection for starters. Republican discipline was very strong and Bush controlled the signals. Furthermore, the Democrats were deeply divided over whether they were seen as too far to the left or too far to the right. The former view was stronger among congressional Democrats, so Bush felt that he could count on some Democratic votes to add to his solid Republican bloc to pass any legislation that he favored.

One year later, all this has changed radically. Almost all the legislation that was on Bush's list has failed to pass. His Republican bloc is now shattered. The moderates have broken discipline, but so have his two right wings -- the fiscal ultra-conservatives and the Christian right. The Democrats now show the discipline that the Republicans had previously shown, so that the Republican breakaways have allowed them to win most crucial votes, especially in the Senate. Bush's poll ratings are very low. Republicans up for reelection are asking Bush not to campaign for them. And some Democratic Congressmen have begun to talk of impeachment.

In Iraq, he is fighting a rear guard action against great pressure to cut and run -- U.S. pressure, Iraqi pressure, and of course pressure from the rest of the world. The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff has stated that the majority of Iraqis want U.S. forces to leave, while Bush is staunchly refusing to set a timetable for downsizing the troops. This is a sham front for the obvious fact that the U.S. and all its allies are withdrawing substantial numbers in 2006, long before what Bush had set as the base point -- when the Iraqi government can deal militarily with the Iraqi resistance.

What happened in 2005 that accounts for such a turn-around in Bush's political strength? Most of the change has occurred within the United States. There were five things that transformed the U.S. political atmosphere. No one of them would have been that damaging, but the events cumulated and combined to make a rolling stone that is gathering momentum.

The first was that the casualty figures in Iraq have been steadily increasing with no sign that the resistance is weakening. The second was Katrina, which revealed a level of incompetence and social indifference in the Bush administration that left people gasping. Bush then promised that the government would repair the damage and pressed Congress to adopt a costly program. This was the straw that broke the back of the Republican fiscal conservatives, long dismayed by the growing level of spending under a president theoretically committed to reducing the size of government.

The third was Bush's ineptness in naming conservative judges to the Supreme Court.



Keith’s Barbeque Central

[ThomWV]

1. Good Article

I do think there are points he missed, certainly Cindy Sheehan had some bearing on the loss of credibility Bush has suffered as have the voices of others. Good though.

[Big Kahuna]

2. Respect my author-i-tay!

[mom cat]

3. Worthwhile read...K&R

[radio4progressives]

4. Contrast this Op Ed to the Corporate MSM ...

If I didn't know better, I'd think I was reading and listening about political dynamics and realities of two entirely different countries.

This piece sends the message that the Dems are now united as one, singing in harmonious unison, (not an oxymoron) are fighting for the people, and intent to seek justice while salvaging our Constitution.

But on the same day this is posted, the Corporate MSM is sending quite a different message - one that suggests that President has powers to do what he has to do in times of war, that the court of public opinion seems to be more concerned with national security and not so concerned with civil liberites, according to a Rasmussen poll (60% apparently say the President didn't do anything wrong) and that there will be a few hearings but ultimately, the most significant thing that will come out of this is that new powers will be legally granted to the Prez in order for him to fight his war on terra.

Pat Buchanan, Pete Williams and a slew of other shills says it so, so then it must be true. Tweety asks where are the Dems? says they've been silent on this issue so this must mean that Dems are at least divided on this issue.

Now I know what these whores on these shows are about, but most of the sheeple do not get it and they didn't read this Op Ed.

So.... what am I as an individual to conclude? What should I dare to hope?

do i have to get into action gear over this matter too as i have been doing over everything that has occured in the past five years?

how are we to judge whether or not there are far more independent thinking citizens who outnumber the sheeple (including the dumb ass DLC shills, operatives and functionaries who would give up our privacy in an instant to get involved in a war in the Middle East)to the extent that it would be possible to salvage our Constitution, restore our democracy, and bring the criminals in the white house to justice before the end of this new year, 2006?

[kliljedahl]

6. I had a problem with that myself

but I think the overall article makes that a minor quibble.



Keith’s Barbeque Central

[radio4progressives]

7. exactly...

right now, i'd welcome a minor quibble! please bring on minor quibbles!

:hi:

[leveymg]

5. The other factor is that the military and intel agencies turned against

Bush in the latter part of 2004, after it became apparent that the Bush White House operatives and the the neocons at DoD were up to their necks in espionage related the planting of false Iraq and Iran WMD evidence, and that the war in Iraq was lost. The nearly simultaneous release of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse photos jelled the public's perception that something was terribly wrong in the Bush Administration's conduct of the war.

In May 2004, the FBI arrested Larry Franklin, a neocon Iran desk officer at Douglas Feith's Pentagon Office of Special Plans (OSP), for his role in trading classified documents with Israeli intelligence officers and AIPAC staffers. The US Attorney from Chicago made his first public moves towards indictments in the Plame case at this time.

These events turned many experienced military, intelligence and law enforcement officers against the Administration, undermining the control of Bush's political appointees within the agencies of the federal government. What has actually occurred is a sort of bloodless revolt in the ranks, and the corporate media has quite consciously also begun to relax its previous lock-step support of the White House.

[radio4progressives]

8. yes, this is an interesting phenom.

did you see today's report on military shutting down troopers personal blogs under the ruse of national security? only allowing the flag waving - "every thing is rosy" blogs to remain on line?

here's the link in case you're interested:



http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-e4572547jan02,0,959146,print.story?coll=ny-linews-headlines

[kliljedahl]

9. Hadn't seen that, interesting

A natural outgrowth of them forcing soldiers to write positive LTTE's, which is well documented.



Keith’s Barbeque Central