Posted on 09/17/2005 1:21:06 PM PDT by RWR8189
PRESIDENT BUSH, LIKE NO president in modern times, has guarded himself against a second-term slump. His most competent aides--the first team--stayed on at the White House. He has a sweeping agenda to keep staff busy and out of trouble. He has a majority in both houses of Congress. The economy, thanks to fresh tax cuts, is booming. Besides all that, Bush has always been lucky in politics.
But with Katrina, his luck betrayed him. There's little defense against a natural disaster that ranks among the worst in American history. Nor is the timing of such an event predictable (Bush and most of his top aides were on vacation). The president's partners in responding to the disaster were a panicky mayor of New Orleans and a do-nothing Louisiana governor. And even if the president had been inclined to deploy federal troops immediately, federal law discouraged him from doing that. So he didn't.
It's the turn in the president's luck and his difficulty in coping with it that has rattled both Bush and his aides. Obviously he can't dismiss his slow response to the hurricane as attributable merely to bad luck. The public wouldn't accept that from a president who prides himself on strong leadership in a crisis. Laying the blame where much of it belongs--on Louisiana officials--would be an act of political pettiness. Americans expect a lot from their presidents, especially when big things happen. Bush couldn't erase those expectations even if he tried. Wisely, he hasn't tried. But the situation has left him a bit flustered.
Two days before his first national address last week on the disaster--and to the surprise of his aides--the president gave an impromptu preview of his speech. The setting was a brief session with reporters as he welcomed Iraqi president Jalal Talabani to the White House. Bush was asked if Americans should be concerned that after Katrina the country isn't ready to deal with another disaster or terrorist attack. The president's response was basically yes.
"Katrina exposed serious problems in our response capability at all levels of government," he said. "And to the extent that the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility." The press reveled in this answer, saying it came from a president who never admits mistakes.
The idea of accepting responsibility was on Bush's mind since he had already decided to include it in his speech to the nation from New Orleans two days later. And despite the premature comment, he left it in the speech. "Four years after the frightening experience of September 11th, Americans have every right to expect a more effective response in a time of emergency," he said. "When the federal government fails to meet such an obligation, I as president am responsible for the problem, and for the solution."
Indeed, he is. While Louisiana governor Kathleen Blanco continues to blame the Bush administration for her own failures, the president has fully taken command. He would have liked to give his major speech a week earlier. In fact, he seriously considered it. But he didn't "have his ducks in a row," a Bush adviser said. There hadn't been enough progress in immediate relief efforts on the Gulf Coast and his recovery plan hadn't been pulled together.
In the meantime, Bush has indulged in micromanagement, something he normally eschews. In briefings and discussions, he has delved into specifics. Having visited the disaster zone four times and talked extensively to officials on the ground, Bush has focused on making sure that what he's told in Washington reflects what's actually going on in Louisiana and Mississippi. This is partly a reaction to his feeling that he didn't get an accurate picture of what was happening in New Orleans in the days just after Katrina.
The recovery program Bush announced in his speech is characteristic of his brand of conservatism. It isn't small government conservatism: Washington has a huge role and the cost will be stupendous. But the federal government's job, in Bush's scheme, would be mostly as a catalyst and an example-setter. Of course his "worker recovery accounts" would be a handout to the hurricane victims. The $5,000 per person stipend is higher than initially planned by the administration. Bush himself insisted it be boosted from a lower figure.
The president's proposal would create a Gulf enterprise zone, slashing taxes and waiving regulations to make the area attractive to entrepreneurs. His emphasis on entrepreneurs may sound like Republican boilerplate, but Bush believes it. "It is entrepreneurship that creates jobs and opportunities. It is entrepreneurship that helps break the cycle of poverty, and we will take the side of entrepreneurs as they lead the economic revival of the Gulf region."
Democrats might want to turn the region into one gigantic public housing project, but Bush doesn't. He wants to promote home ownership, a key component of his vision of an "ownership society." Bush wants to open unused federal property to housing. Federal land would be given, through a lottery, to poor people for free. "In return," he said, "they would pledge to build on the lot, with either a mortgage or help from a charitable organization." Republicans, including those appalled at how much Bush wants to spend, will like this idea.
For political salvation, Bush needs more than a big plan. He needs his luck to return. Fortunately for him, the worst predictions of post-Katrina horrors aren't coming true. Instead of 10,000 dead in New Orleans, it's likely to be fewer than 1,000. Rather than pipelines and refineries out of commission for months, they're coming back on line in a matter of days. With luck, the recovery plan will get off the ground quickly, despite Democratic opposition and Republican qualms. And if it does, Bush's personal political recovery will be close behind.
Fred Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard. His book on President Bush, Rebel-in-Chief, will be published in January by Crown Forum.
Fact based Reality? LOL. I should have looked at your shrine to Bush home page before I bothered to respond.
Always been fascinated by those who adore Presidents- of either party- in near worship. Seems unAmerican somehow.
Why don't you do a little study and find out what's going on in Iraq.........check out military sources for the facts...........before you further embarrass yourself among people who know what's going on?
Your Carter/Bush parallel is beyond ludicrous, and you haven't successfully defended a word of it.
That, of course, is because you can't...... because it's totally absurd and made in complete ignorance of both Presidents.
You have the 'honor' of saying one of the most preposterous, indefensible comments ever posted on FR in the more than four years I've been around.
Pretty amazing, considering all the dumb stuff people say. Congratulations on scraping the bottom of the irrational barrel. I guess that's what believing the leftist media drivel will do for you, eh?
You are certain to get your wish. History will judge Bush on the results in Iraq.
If the instability and daily violence is just fiction from the media, if Democracy will flourish there, if pigs fly, I may join you in erecting a shrine to Bush.
Meanwhile several years after overthrowing Saddam, with all going so well, could you tell me why Iraqi oil isn't flowing?
Did you expect it to flow into the pockets of George Bush and his oil buddies?
How deeply do you believe the leftist lies anyway??
btw..........if you really looked at my homepage, you'll see that the only One I worship is the Almighty God, through His Son, Jesus. And you'll see on that page, many pictures of a very brave young man...........my son...........who spent over a year in Baghdad to protect your freedom and keep you safe.
And he, like the other heroes who have been fighting this just and noble war in Iraq, didn't go there willingly only to protect those people who appreciate it and understand why it has to be done. They went there for YOU too.........even if you don't care enough to find out what's really going on there....
A better comparison is Dubya with LBJ. "Compassionate Conservatism" has turned out to be the Great Society rendition 2.
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.