The bungling Bush presidency is falling apart

Newsday ^ | March 3, 2006 | James Klurfeld

[Cannoneer No. 4]

An old acquaintance in Washington - a former member of Republican administrations whose foreign policy views are decidedly hard-line - recently had this to say to a friend about the Bush administration: This might be the most inept administration in American history.

But it should come as no surprise that President George W. Bush has fallen to an approval rating of 34 percent in a recent national poll. Just look at the events in this winter of his discontent:

Members of his own party have turned against him on the issues of whether a company owned by the United Arab Emirates should control six major ports in the United States.

As more and more information leaks out about the unauthorized and very likely illegal eavesdropping by the National Security Administration, there is more talk - only whispered at the moment - that there ought to be an impeachment inquiry into Bush's behavior.

But I fear we are now seeing the other side of the coin with Bush. His lack of historical perspective, his crusading religiousness, his Texas-style shoot-first-ask-questions-later approach to complex problems - that is, all the shortcomings that were obvious from the beginning of his presidency - seem to be catching up with him now. It's one thing to be a decisive leader. It is quite another to be consistently making the wrong decisions.

This is a presidency coming unraveled before our eyes. It is not a pretty sight, and it is not good for the country. What a difference a year makes. After his re-election, Bush said that he would use his political capital.

Soon he won't have any left. Then what?

[maryz]

How quickly we forget Jimmy Carter.

Just yesterday, a caller on Howie Carr named Carter as the greatest [sic] president. (Howie went on for a good five minutes recalling the details of those glory years!)

[dirtboy]

Not lately.

Ah, so if I don't march in lock-step, I'm an unappeasable.

Thanks for showing what you are all about. No dissent allowed.

[wtc911]

A number of times, decades ago, I was familiar with the details of local news stories. Every one was grossly mis-reported in Newsday. This constant distortion of simple facts added to their social-engineering, hard left editorial style has rendered the paper useless. And, they were successfully sued by their advertisers for inflating circulation stats.

They are dishonest in every way.

[vwunpimsmyride]

Yeah, Jimmy Carter was the worst. Wasn't the Misery Index created during his administration?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Have I crushed your dissent, dirtboy?

[Steely Tom]

I'm sure I'll regret getting in the middle of this, but when I read CNo4's remark about Freepers preferring Hillary to the President, I thought "what an odd thing to say, but CNo4's been here a long time and I know him to be a pretty solid conservative, so what could he mean... maybe he means that many Freepers prefer Hillary's position on port security to that of the President, and while I'm certainly not one of those because I think Hillary is a lying shrew opportunist who's position on port security is the purist posturing, but perhaps CNo4 woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning and doesn't really mean what he said."

(steely)

[dirtboy]

Have I crushed your dissent, dirtboy?

No, just made yourself look foolish.

[dawn53]

History shows now Reagan brought an end to the Cold War, spurred economic growth during peace time that was unparalled, and created millions of new jobs for this country. This from an Administration that was viewed as floundering.

Bush has faced more than his share of national crisis' equal to, if not greater than the Cold War.

From 9/11 to the WOT, the Chinese incident with the grounding of our plane, Katrina and the mess that is New Orleans, and the constant threat of more terrorism on our soil.

When history looks back at the Bush years, IMHO, they will be amazed (as I am) that we were not "hit again" post 9/11 for such a long period of time.

Somebody, must be doing something right...it's just you never hear about it.

Same with the Iraq war, our casualty figures are low, very low, compared to past conflicts/wars. (Just be glad the MSM wasn't around during Normandy or the Battle of the Bulge.)

[Cannoneer No. 4]

If you go to keyword ports you will see a tremendous amount of Bush-bashing. A number of freepers do appear to prefer Hillary's word over the President's on ports.

All the Bush-hatred expressed on FR lately is giving our enemies cause to rejoice.

Anybody who isn't appropriately fearful of DPW operating terminals in our ports is wrong and anybody who isn't totally disgusted with Bush is a kool-aid drinking Bushbot. Two and a half years of that is going to put Hillary in the White House.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

With this title, no barf alert required.

[arasina]

Tony Snow himself has stated he is mystified as to why thiw White House allows itself to be defined by their enemies. This administration seems to want and let the alternate/new media - talk radio, the internet - defend him while at the same time continually sucking up to the old media.

Tony Snow had better watch out for speaking his mind. If he keeps up with any criticism, even if it is constructive, he will soon be put in a league with Helen Thomas or David Gregory.

I'm in agreement with your speculation; this administration fights back with rubber bullets and water balloons. The sucking up to the old media you describe is apparently a symptom of Reach Across The Aisle Sucking Syndrome. Other early symptoms include a highly flexible and pliant backbone, boot-shaped dents on the butt cheeks and raw, puckered lips. Those who 'suffer' from RATASS are not called victims because they are actually willing participants. In its final stages, observers can neither distinguish a politician's party nor determine sucker from suckee.

[SuziQ]

I wish I had a dollar for every time this idea appeared in the news over the last 6 years.

[devane617]

Bush is attacking himself. Face many supports have left the Bush camp, or packing their bags. I think we should not concern ourselves with Bush, because he is a lost cause. We should concentrate on keeping a Republican led congress.

[Cincinatus]

That's fine and dandy, but in order to marshal public support, a president needs to effectively use the bully pulpit - the classic example being Ronald Reagan, who fought a press that was just as hostile.

Bush has done and continues to do that. You cannot take a single-time point snapshot and claim that Bush's support has collapsed. Even this port deal has yet to fully play itself out. I agree that Bush needs to make a better public case for this decision and I think he will. Of course, it won't satisfy the pitchforkers, but what could he do that would?

As far as Reagan is concerned, a lot of his popularity during his term of office is retrospective. Have a look at this interesting piece More Gloss for the Gipper. Reagan only ranks in the middle of modern Presidents in terms contemporaneous approval.

[television is just wrong]

There is ONE BIG TOPIC that his presidency is falling over. That topic would be, "Illegal Immigration" and his refusal to enforce existing laws...

When congress etc, talk about immigration reform, it is NOT what we, meaning 85% and + of the country are actually wanting.

[dirtboy]

All the Bush-hatred expressed on FR lately is giving our enemies cause to rejoice.

Most of what you call "Bush hatred" is legitimate criticism. And it would behoove the Bush Admin to listen to the concerns of those who voted for him if they wish to continue to have a GOP majority in Congress in 2006 and for the GOP to have a shot at winning the White House again in 2008. The base will only go so long with not having many of their core concerns addressed such as spending and illegal immigration.

[dfwgator]

Dream on James.

[poindexter]

David Gergen.

[dirtboy]

Bush has done and continues to do that.

I disagree. Time and time again, his Administration has let the Dems and the media define the debate. In the one key instance lately where they took the offensive, namely the NSA wiretapping matter, they won over public opinion.

And lately, they have really not been on top of things at all. From failing to release the information about the Cheney hunting accident in a timely manner to having Bush threaten a veto over the ports deal BEFORE explaining in detail the issues, they have shot themselves in the foot repeatedly. And when the Dems and the media are constantly firing at you, the worst thing to do is fruther their agenda with self-inflicted wounds.

You cannot take a single-time point snapshot and claim that Bush's support has collapsed.

I am not saying such. However, the cumulative effect is sapping the resolve of many conservatives to keep supporting the Bush Admin despite their disregard for key concerns such as illegal immigration. I would venture that if Bush had made a serious attempt by now to combat illegal immigration, many conservatives opposed to the ports deal would be more inclined to take Bush's word on this one.

As far as Reagan is concerned, a lot of his popularity during his term of office is retrospectivem

I am not talking about Reagan's popularity. I am talking about his ability to define the debate and his message in the face of a hostile media - lessons that the Bush Admin would be wise to heed.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

What's the difference between "Bush-hatred" and "legitimate criticism" if either one weakens him to the point that a Republican President can't get elected in 2008? So many are so ready to consign him to the ash heap of history but he still has three years of commander-in-chiefing to do. There is a war on. Does anybody owe him any loyalty?