Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It Doesn't Get Any Better Than This
The Weekly Standard ^ | December 29, 2003 | Fred Barnes

Posted on 12/19/2003 9:22:34 PM PST by RWR8189

PRESIDENT BUSH has gotten a bigger reelection boost in a shorter period of time than any other president ever. And that may be putting it mildly. Yes, Sherman's taking of Atlanta in early September 1864 was critical to Lincoln's reelection, and Bill Clinton's signing of welfare reform in 1996 assured him a second term. But those don't quite match the gust of good news for Bush between Thanksgiving and Christmas.

Here's the list: capture of Saddam Hussein, Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi's about-face, enactment of a prescription drug entitlement, signing of the first rollback of Roe v. Wade, fastest economic growth in 19 years, quickest pace in worker productivity gains in 20 years, two-decade high in increased manufacturing activity, significant drop in jobless claims, lowest underlying rate of inflation in 38 years, and rock-bottom interest rates. Oh, yes, the stock market: A week before Christmas, the Dow's up 23 percent for the year, 4 percent since Thanksgiving.

Let's not give Bush a big head and declare his reelection a done deal. He still faces daunting problems (job losses, post-Saddam insurgency in Iraq, al Qaeda, nukes in Iran and North Korea, energized opponents at home). But, to Bush's credit, the string of accomplishments on the eve of 2004 are mostly his own doing. It turns out more troops were not needed in Iraq, at least not to seize Saddam. The answer, as the administration insisted, was better intelligence. Bush's tax cuts, nearly everyone agrees, were the catalyst in rejuvenating the economy. A full-blown recovery is now a given. Bush had helpers like Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan and a good bit of luck. As the baseball saying goes, it's better to be lucky than good. It's better still to be in Bush's situation, lucky and good.

Grabbing Saddam produced a reversal in the Iraq debate. Saddam at large was the symbol of Bush's losing the battle of postwar Iraq. His captivity is the symbol of Bush's winning that battle. For months now, Saddam will be the story--his imprisonment, his interrogation, his atrocities, his prosecution, his punishment. When the spotlight is on Saddam in chains, Bush gains. If the terrorism directed by Saddam's cronies continues to abate, as it did in the days after his capture, Bush will gain further. In any case, he's no longer on defense in the debate over Iraq.

His foes are no longer on offense. Democrats were flummoxed by Saddam's capture. Columnist Robert Novak reported that Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, a top deputy to Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle, had taped a radio statement, sneering at the prospects of seizing Saddam. It was to be broadcast the day after Saddam was captured. The Democratic presidential candidates, along with Sen. Hillary Clinton, responded to the capture with the cliché that Bush must "internationalize" the war in Iraq. This was a non sequitur: Because Bush's policy in Iraq was working, it was time to change the policy. That is not a serious argument.

Democrats exuded an air of unreality. They called for the United Nations to assume a bigger role in Iraq just days after Secretary General Kofi Annan announced the United Nations had no intention of doing that. They said Bush should recruit more foreign troops to replace American soldiers in Iraq. But there was no evidence any country was prepared to dispatch troops. And the Saddam capture led to more conspiracy-theorizing by Democrats. Congressman Jim McDermott of Washington suggested Saddam was ripe for seizure any time and Bush had planned the event for political gain. Of course this clashed with the standard Democratic criticism that Bush had lost control of postwar Iraq.

Democratic presidential frontrunner Howard Dean reacted with remarkable pigheadedness. He inserted in a speech the claim that Saddam's jailing did not make America safer. Earlier he had said Saddam was a "threat" to the United States. So Dean would have it that a threat was removed with no gain in safety for America. That defies logic. Besides, documents from Saddam's briefcase showed he was in regular touch, by courier, with terrorist cells perpetrating attacks on American soldiers and Iraqis. Once that was known, Dean could have revised his view. He didn't. He tossed out three charges against the president. One, Bush had claimed a direct link between al Qaeda and Saddam and later retracted the claim. Two, Bush had said the United States knew where Saddam's weapons of mass destruction were. Three, Bush had declared Saddam an "imminent danger." Dean was wrong on all three counts.

When was Bush lucky? That occurred as he dispatched former secretary of state James Baker on a mission to win debt relief for Iraq. Months ago, the administration made it known that countries not helping in Iraq would be ineligible for contracts to rebuild the country. The press missed this. Shortly before Baker departed for France and Germany, a routine Defense Department memo formally limiting the contracts was reported in the press. The belated scoop was the lucky part for the president. It created a media firestorm that Bush exploited to reiterate his policy and show the United States wouldn't be "played for patsies," as a White House official said. And the French and others finally "understood the ground rule is you've got to help" in Iraq. The result: They began to help, welcoming Baker and promising to forgive some or all of the Iraqi debt amassed by Saddam.

The White House has refrained from gloating. "We're happy with success, but we're looking forward" to 2004, Bush adviser Karl Rove said. Bush has a theme, the "ownership society," and a fat agenda that includes "lifetime savings accounts"--essentially tax-free IRAs with no penalties for withdrawal--and Social Security investment accounts. Bush's idea is to give Americans ownership of their money for retirement, health care, and everything now in the hands of government or other providers. Achieving all this would be a major feat, almost as amazing as what Bush wrought in late 2003.

Fred Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: fredbarnes; gwb2004; libya; weeklystandard
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-108 next last
To: RWR8189
The demonrats play to their voters, high school drop outs, that believe that black churches were burning in Clinton's home town when he was a boy, etc.

They will easily buy the most outrageous statements, so demonrat candidates don't have to worry if they sound psycotic to thinking people as long as they sound angry and concerned to their pitiful constituients.
21 posted on 12/19/2003 11:12:28 PM PST by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
Congressman Jim McDermott of Washington suggested Saddam was ripe for seizure any time and Bush had planned the event for political gain

And let's not forget about Mad-Maddie Halfwit and her question to Mort Kondracke about Bush hiding away Osama!

As one freeper quipped the other night, Albright might as well have accused Bush of, "finding Jimmy Hoffa's body, Amelia Earhart's crash sight, and the cure for cancer right before the 2004 election". She is one pathetic creature.

22 posted on 12/19/2003 11:16:35 PM PST by thesummerwind (like painted kites, those days and nights, they went flyin' by)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thesummerwind
That second paragraph is one great list of accomplishments.

Shore is!

Here's the list: capture of Saddam Hussein, Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi's about-face, enactment of a prescription drug entitlement, signing of the first rollback of Roe v. Wade, fastest economic growth in 19 years, quickest pace in worker productivity gains in 20 years, two-decade high in increased manufacturing activity, significant drop in jobless claims, lowest underlying rate of inflation in 38 years, and rock-bottom interest rates. Oh, yes, the stock market: A week before Christmas, the Dow's up 23 percent for the year, 4 percent since Thanksgiving.

Might I add "tax cuts?"

23 posted on 12/19/2003 11:19:07 PM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: thesummerwind
She walked into a conference room for a meeting with other diplomats, and they thought she was the cleaning lady. True story.!!
24 posted on 12/19/2003 11:23:26 PM PST by woodyinscc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: onyx
And another accomplishment of G.W.'s ......Laura Bush!

What a lady. Can you believe the incredibly vast difference between her and the last revolting "occupant"?

25 posted on 12/19/2003 11:24:20 PM PST by thesummerwind (like painted kites, those days and nights, they went flyin' by)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: woodyinscc; thesummerwind
She walked into a conference room for a meeting with other diplomats, and they thought she was the cleaning lady. True story.!!

That was so hilarious! It IS true. Madeline was mistaken for a cleaning lady. Heck, she looks the part or worse. Haggard, stooped and sneering.

26 posted on 12/19/2003 11:28:16 PM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: woodyinscc
Yeh, I've seen her referred to here on FR many times over the past days as "the cleaning lady". You wouldn't be able to direct me to that first reference would you? She certainly is one HAG!

BTW, not to discredit cleaning ladies - if you ever watched 'Seinfeld' alot, George 'got it on' with a cleaning lady on his desk at the workplace in one of the episodes. It was hillarious!

27 posted on 12/19/2003 11:28:40 PM PST by thesummerwind (like painted kites, those days and nights, they went flyin' by)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bray
Nakita Dean & Co are going to be judged very harshly for being on the wrong side of history. This was a historic week and 20 years from now W and RR are going to be judged as 2 of the greatest Presidents in the past 100 years. Between the 2 of them they liberated 150 million people from brutal Stalinist Dictators. In 3 months the insurgency will be pretty much contained w/o Suddamn. Pray for W and The Truth

Good post. I don't know that Bush is the best president we've ever had, but I'd say he's got to be close to the most righteous president we've had so far based on what we've seen of him so far in his presidency.

28 posted on 12/19/2003 11:30:28 PM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: hobson
Definately a keeper.
29 posted on 12/19/2003 11:38:25 PM PST by hobson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Heck, she looks the part or worse. Haggard, stooped and sneering.

I'm not trying to be "a stick in the mud" here, but there are alot of nice women who are cleaning ladies!

But I hear you about Maddie's appearance. You look up "hag" in the dictionary, and there she is! And I can't stand what she did to our country in Korea and elsewhere. She's an outright idiot. Isn't it amazing how many idiots (blackmailable?) Clinton hired. Janet Reno comes to mind.

30 posted on 12/19/2003 11:38:26 PM PST by thesummerwind (like painted kites, those days and nights, they went flyin' by)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
What a great article!
31 posted on 12/19/2003 11:41:30 PM PST by lonevoice (Some things have to be believed to be seen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
bump.....for later.....cause I'm tired.
32 posted on 12/19/2003 11:44:04 PM PST by cars for sale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: King Prout
"this is a keeper."

I agree, W certainly is a keeper. :))
33 posted on 12/20/2003 12:07:50 AM PST by CaliGirlGodHelpMe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ouachita
Free Saddam?

Oh goody! Where can I get one?

; )
34 posted on 12/20/2003 12:24:46 AM PST by Prime Choice (Leftist opinions may be free, but I still feel like I'm getting ripped off every time I receive one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
BTTT! God bless our President!
35 posted on 12/20/2003 12:25:23 AM PST by Prime Choice (Leftist opinions may be free, but I still feel like I'm getting ripped off every time I receive one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
ping~
36 posted on 12/20/2003 12:50:24 AM PST by lainde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
Democrats exuded an air of unreality. They called for the United Nations to assume a bigger role in Iraq just days after Secretary General Kofi Annan announced the United Nations had no intention of doing that. They said Bush should recruit more foreign troops to replace American soldiers in Iraq. But there was no evidence any country was prepared to dispatch troops.


I think that the Democraps know that much of what they are "calling for" isn't feasible. My guess is that they're just doing it to create talking points, "We urged this President on multiple occasions to go to the UN, to replace American troops with foreign troops, and so on.." One of the other things that they've "called for" as nauseam is more troops. I heard Dick Morris say that he believed the request for more troops was really an effort to make President Bush reinstate the draft (we're already using reserves). Has anyone else heard this? Does anyone else subscribe to that theory? It's an interesting thought because aside from partisan political gain, there is no logical reason for all of the Assrabbits to keep parroting "more troops....more troops....more troops......."
37 posted on 12/20/2003 1:22:55 AM PST by Jaysun (Get real, Control-Everybody-But-Yourselves freaks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
I also think when election season really begins (when the Bush team engages) that the RATs are going to pay a price for their judicial obstructionism.
38 posted on 12/20/2003 1:36:51 AM PST by Aeronaut (In my humble opinion, the new expression for backing down from a fight should be called 'frenching')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
President Bush is brilliant, and what's more, he's brilliant FOR us! For OUR security, OUR prosperity, OUR well-being!
39 posted on 12/20/2003 1:42:51 AM PST by WaterDragon (GWB is The MAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WaterDragon
bump
40 posted on 12/20/2003 3:56:27 AM PST by patj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-108 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson