"All that is old and already formed can continue to live only if it allows within itself the conditions of a new beginning."
Salvaging George
Bush's PresidencyPosted 5:43 p.m., Oct. 28, 2005
|
It's not too late. The Dubya presidency can be saved. And since George Bush is not a president who is going to do the right thing by (figuratively) stripping down, stepping into a hot bath, and opening a main vein--you know, like Dick Nixon did--his presidency must be salvaged.
I say that with all apologies to my liberal chums who hold the conviction that "W" stands for "worst in the history of the United States." But we need a president. Even a bad one.
A few weeks ago, I concluded a column by warning that Plamegate might result in a a helmless presidency, a national disaster in any age. And this is the Age of Terror.
Eight days after my column was published, the American Enterprise Institute's resident moderate, Norm Ornstein, made nearly the same observation.
"No doubt some hardcore partisans and ideologues would exult. But with the domestic and foreign policy challenges the country faces, it would be a disaster for all of us. We are in the same boat, and if it is rudderless, we all sink."
Those concerns are today amplifed by word from former congressman Bob Barr on CNN, indicating that prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation may reach into the top levels of the National Security Council. In his rambling, though impressive press conference this afternoon, Fitzgerald gave no indication of his future intentions after indicting Scooter Libby. But it is clear the investigation is not over, even though he would have to impanel a new grand jury to move forward.
If true, Barr's revelation could have tremendous impact on the government's ability to conduct foreign policy. Any foreign policy. The National Security Council, after all, is chaired by the president.
We're Having a Cabal
I wouldn't necessarily take Bob Barr's surmise as gospel. Other than his statements, there doesn't appear to be anything linking the president to Plamegate. If anything, the evidence points the other way.
Take the stunning column published Oct. 25 in the Los Angeles Times, by Colin Powell's former State Department chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson. In it, Wilkerson writes in the starkest terms that "the most important decisions about national security" during the first Bush term were made by "a secretive, little-known cabal," led by Vice President Dick Cheney, and Cheney's mentor, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
It is not hard to imagine that in voicing these views, Wilkerson is standing in for the stable-mannered Powell, who may be considering a run as vice presidential running mate to John McCain in 2008, and could hardly afford to look this bug-eyed himself. Whether or not that is true, Wilkerson's words carry particular weight, because as chief of staff to a recent Republican Secretary of State, he is undeniably in a position to know how White House national security policy works.
"I believe that the decisions of this cabal were sometimes made with the full and witting support of the president and sometimes with something less. More often than not, then-national security advisor Condoleezza Rice was simply steamrolled. ..."Its insular and secret workings were efficient and swift — not unlike the decision-making one would associate more with a dictatorship than a democracy."
-- Lawrence B. Wilkerson,
"The White House Cabal,"
Los Angeles Times
Oct. 25, 2005Holy rat crap, Batman!
Negotiating the Mouse Maze
As I've said before, love him or hate him, we're stuck with this guy George Bush. He can yet save himself from lame-duck status, and the nation from exposure to a headless state. If he ate his Wheaties, he could even transform himself into something resembling an effective leader.
All he has to do is what he indicated before he was elected in 2000 was his intent from the beginning: Lead from the center. In other words, make "compassionate conservatism" mean something more substantive than "everything's better with Blue Bonnet on it."
To survive, to keep his head in the game while all around him are under indictment--so far, only Scooter Libby is charged with anything, but who knows what's coming next?--the president must engage in some classic Bill Clinton triangulation.
That will make the president's political base very unhappy, because it means drifting away from doing God's work, and going to work for the people who hired him. Bummer for the base. And it won't much please liberal Democrats, who desire nothing so much as to march around the White House with the president's head on a skewer. Double bummer for them.
It's better for us if the president pulls through. And for that, we need him to move squarely into the center and start presiding over this nation's affairs like a grownup.
What does leading from the center mean? It might sound like a Democratic agenda--and maybe it is close to the centrist Democratic Leadership Council's agenda. So be it. Leading from the center:
You'll notice that in this list, there are no ideas for conducting the Iraq war from the center. Maybe Powell could be brought in to replace Cheney? I don't know. The war is such a complete mess, the prospects for ultimate American success so dismal--whether we stay or pull out--that no good options seem available. To that point, Godspeed to those in charge.
- means beginning the much neglected process of fixing the nation's mountainous fiscal problems by refusing to extend the tax cuts for the rich and taking a hard look at spending.
- means putting the brakes on entitlement extensions--like the Medicare drug benefit--until a valid way can be found to pay for them, without putting hundreds of billions on the national credit card for our decendants to inherit--a terrible choice that has been labeled "fiscal child abuse" by my friend Tim Penny.
- means finding a way to pay for the war, again without taxing our kids and grandkids.
- means committing to the promises made to the people of the Gulf Coast whose lifestyles were blown away by Katrina. Rescinding the decision to reinstate Davis-Bacon wage provisions in New Orleans was a beginning. But this will require budget cuts--and possibly some kind of modest emergency tax hike--to cover that bill.
- means getting serious about reforming New Deal programs to meet the realities of modern demographics. That means revamping Social Security by pushing hard for means testing and cutting the wealthiest off from receiving retirement funds they don't need--without letting them off the hook for contributing into the fund. In relative terms, the wealthy don't contribute that much to their Social Security benefits anyway and they enjoy lots of other offsetting tax benefits. They've got no complaint to make.
Cleaning House
Those are all policies. Before any of that takes place, though, the first thing this president needs to do--if he wants to regain any semblance of confidence among Americans--is to clean house. Get rid of this entire blundering crowd of advisers, including the secretary of defense. The vice president, as an elected official, would either have to resign, or be exiled to attending the funerals of minor dignitaries and chairing obscure academic conferences.
This is precisely what Ronald Reagan did to survive Irangate (though his equally culpable vice president survived that cut). I'd personally like to see the even-handed veteran operative David Gergen brought in to replace Karl Rove.
Rove is over-politicized the way Mick Jagger is over-sexed. And his influence over this nation has been absolutely dismal, absolutely nefarious. We need to get this malicious Machiavellian out of our nation's business.
Don't like Gergen? Fine. Bring on Fred Dalton Thompson. Conservatives love him. No problem. He's at least a verifiable grown-up. Bring on Vin Weber, a staunch Gingrich conservative and one of the smartest people in Washington--he'll be almost as ruthless as Rove, but at least he fights by Marquis of Queensbury rules. Bring on anyone who can finally replace Colin Powell as the adult in the room, and let's weed out these rebellious, too-clever-by-half middle-schoolers who fantacized us off to war.
This is a president who prizes loyalty over all. Obviously, he'd make a great friend. But we don't need a First Buddy in the White House, we need a statesman and a leader. A hard-ass, even. Not just someone who plays one on TV.
So here's my message to our embattled president:
Screw loyalty, sir. You're not presiding over Skull and Bones here, you're running the country. You were elected to make tough decisions, to represent us all, even those who didn't vote for you. Not just a small, faithful cross-section of red-staters. The people you've surrounded yourself with, they've blown it, in almost every conceivable way. And you haven't fired anyone since you canned Paul O'Neill. Instead, you've given some of the biggest losers the Medal of Freedom.
"Saturday Night Live" couldn't make stuff like that up.
If you want to win us back, Mr. President, it starts by showing some of the steely resolve that you claim to have. That means dumping your cabinet, having the courage to start with a clean slate, and going about doing the people's business, not your party's business.
If you can't do that, sir, you should just walk away. It proves you're the wrong man for this job.
-- Kevin Featherly
