If looks like a lame duck, and he quacks like a lame duck…

October 18, 2006

The WaPo ran a good front-page piece today on what seems like an increasingly likely scenario: a Democratic Congress will be “the end of George W. Bush’s presidency as he has known it.” The question then becomes, of course, what exactly would the White House do for its final two years.

The Post’s Peter Baker and Michael Fletcher actually found a few people willing to suggest that Bush could turn over a more bi-partisan leaf.

“One of the lessons for President Bush if he loses one or both chambers is the California example,” said Sergio Bendixen, a pollster for Democrats. “Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger at this time in 2005 was considered to be in deep trouble. But now he is a shoo-in for reelection. How did he turn things around? He has gone from a very partisan Republican to somebody who was working with the other party. I wouldn’t be surprised if Bush does the same thing.”

John Bridgeland, a former Bush domestic policy adviser consulted by the White House in recent planning, said that regardless of who wins the election, the president would benefit from cooperating across party lines. “Without doing so, it will be more difficult to get things done that will be lasting,” he said.

I have no idea what these guys are talking about. Bush only knows one way to operate — he doesn’t “do nuance” and he doesn’t “work with the other party.”

Harold Meyerson has a great op-ed today exploring what, exactly, a Democratic Congress would do legislatively. Look over the agenda and tell me if Bush is likely to take a Schwarzenegger-like approach to getting things done.

In the House, the Democrats have made clear that there’s a first tier of legislation they mean to bring to a vote almost immediately after the new Congress convenes. It includes raising the minimum wage, repealing the Medicare legislation that forbids the government from negotiating with drug companies for lower prices, replenishing student loan programs, funding stem cell research and implementing those recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission that have thus far languished.

All these measures command massive popular support. The reason they’ve not been enacted is that House Republicans have passed rules making it impossible for the Democrats to offer amendments to any significant legislation, thereby sparing themselves the indignity of having to choose, say, between the interests of their financial backers in the drug industry and their constituents.

It’s far too soon to know for sure what’s going to happen, but I suspect a Dem Congress, if there’s a Dem Congress, would simply dare Bush to veto everything in sight. (What’s more, they’d put Republicans like John McCain on the spot by bringing popular measures to the floor, and daring them to oppose the bills before the 2008 presidential election.)

Frankly, I’m a little surprised the WaPo found anyone willing to say, out loud, that Bush might be willing to govern in a non-partisan fashion. Cooperate with congressional Democrats? Sign progressive legislation that he’s vehemently opposed for six years? Put aside a rigid ideology to get something done?

We’ve all been watching the same Bush, right?

The question then becomes, of course, what exactly would the White House do for its final two years.

I’ll tell you what: he will engineer disaster after disaster so that, in 2008, Republicans can say, You put Democrats in charge two years ago, and look at what a mess that turned into! Bush will have nothing else on his agenda other than making Democrats look bad, to enable the GOP to recapture Congress and hold the White House.

  • As a good Democrat, it kills me to say nice things about our party leaders, but Nancy Pelosi’s declaration a Democratic House would revive the pay-as-you-go budget concept is very smart. It might even end the war in Iraq.
    Sometime next year, the administration will have to submit another supplemental appropriation for Iraq and Afghanistan. Dems could simply tack on a (most targeted at the wealthy) tax increase equal to the figure requested.
    This would leave the Republicans with two options-swallowing the tax, or voting on the slogan, “Iraq, it’s worth dying for, just not paying for.”

  • Why use the veto pen when you can issue signing statements? Bush has been ignoring or contradicting inconvenient legislation for six years now. The nice thing about signing statements is that it would allow Bush to appear “bipartisan” while still giving a healthy “F*** You!” to a Democratic Congress. The trained media monkeys aren’t going to take much notice that Bush simultaneously signed a bill into law and states he has the right to ignore it completely.

    Has anyone posed a legal challenge to signing statements yet? I’d hope the courts would take a dim view of the president giving himself extra-constitutional powers.

  • I just want to see Cardinal Richelieu, er, I mean Karl Rove, with his ass permanently joined to a witness chair, being picked up and moved from congressional investigation to congressional investigation, with this lie being confronted by that one and then that one and then that one…

    I want to see Mehlman indicted for – at a minimum – his role in PhoneGate.

    If we have both houses, I want to see Cheney impeached and driven to finally have that fatal heart attack he’s been threatening to have the past six years. If it can happen in public and we get to see the body twitch while his face turns blue on national TV, so much the better.

    Let’s de-fund everything associated with the White House, including the phone and the lights, and mothball Air Force One for two years. Let Moron Boy sit there and “twist slowly in the wind” for each minute of his remaining time.

    And then in 2008, sic the IRS on Robertson, Falwell, Dobson, Perkins, and the rest of the American Taliban. Let them lose what’s really important to them: their money.

  • My guess is he’ll spend the next two years in Crawford “clearing brush” (including the barbed wire Laura put around the liquor cabinet?), occasionally flying back to DC to veto a stem cell bill or two. Congress will be paralysed because the dem majority won’t be veto-proof. The country’s attention will be focused on the ’08 elections, where Repubs will try to make the case against “gridlock” (remember, they have no shame).

    Oh well, better than what we have now.

  • I’m going to repeat my response to the previous topic.

    For fiscal malfeasance alone the new Democratic majority ought to set as its highest priority Impeachment of this entire administration, Cabinet officers included. Since much of the $300 billion sucked into the Iraq Quagmire went to private companies, the second priority should be setting up a Commission on War Profiteering. Offering leniency to those willing to share inside information ought to guarantee us 24/7 TeeVee coverage of the hearings for all of the next session of Congress and beyond. During the First Hundred Days of the new Congress we should roll back all the tax cuts (or re-direct them to working people) and restore Constitutional guarantees of our liberties. Should be an exciting time watching the Bush Crime Family furtively looking for some rock under which to slither.

  • Republicans can say, You put Democrats in charge two years ago, and look at what a mess that turned into!

    This will work about as well as everything else they have tried.

    Watching Pelosi torture Bush the next couple of years will be very sweet. If we are lucky he will have a public meltdown.

    Dems could simply tack on a (most targeted at the wealthy) tax increase equal to the figure requested.

    They will simply lie, as they always do, and claim that the tax increase applies mostly to middle-income people. The good news is it won’t work.

  • I don’t think Bush will rely on his signing statements, because I think that just the act of him signing bills that the left wants would damage him on the right. That’s where the publicity would lie, in the bill passing.

    I think Bush would raise petulance to a new level: Most Petulant Ever?

    If I were in charge…the first order of business would be a public invesitgation of the failures in security by the Bush administration. Look at the ports, the corruption, etc. This would build more security credibility for the 2008 elections.

    I’d haul those oil executives back in under oath and demand some answers and some truth about their dealings with Cheney. And start some arrests to get the “big boys” attention.

  • I think it’s infinitely more likely that El Doltidente would simply declare all Democratic Congresspersons and Senators as “enemy combatants” than he’ll develop some sort of “bi-partisan” strategy. After all, you’re either with us or against us….

  • brainiac.

    Signing statements are a paper tiger. Legally, they don’t mean anything (particularly if they contradict the clear language of the bill being signed). The only reason Bush gets away with it is because the GOP majority refuses to do oversight. With a real opposition congress, funny business like signing statements will become irrelevant.

    For those calling for impeachment, it’ll come but not right away. First we’ll go through 6 months to a year of stonewalling.

  • If looks like a lame duck, and he quacks like a lame duck…

    . . .and smells like a commerical poultry confinement

  • “what exactly would the White House do for its final two years?”

    Um, respond to subpoenas, get interrogated at hearings, get impeached, indicted, and incarcerated. Those are the actions I hope to see them taking.

    As for the Dems, the to-do list is endless, but let’s put repealing yesterday’s abrogation of the Constitution and the American way of life at the top, eh.

  • If the Dems get both houses, my first order of business would be the nuclear option. They wanted it then. Let’em have it now. Then I’d change every Senate rule that gives the minority party any power whatsoever. It would be lockdown time.

  • Two words: Signing Statement.

    The Crony-in-Chief can pretend to be non-partisan and sign every frickin’ thing put on his desk.

    Then exercise his Despotic Powers with the nullifying Signing Statement.

    Who would Truman Torture?

  • I really enjoy the thought of Bush facing adult supervision for the first time in his worthless life. And I agree with comment #8 that a public meltdown–maybe a few of them–could well be in the offing.

    But even if we win next month, the moment of danger won’t have passed. The whole era of Bush misrule has pushed our Constitutional system to the brink, as he and his flying monkeys have posited that there are no checks on the power of the executive. The theory hasn’t been tested, because the legislature has put party loyalty over patriotic duty and the mandates of the Constitution; next year, if the Democrats are in charge, they won’t be nearly as accommodating.

    So the question will arise: are we to remain faithful to a model that served us extraordinarily well for 212 years, or one that has led us to the brink of disaster over the subsequent six years?

  • Vetoes are so 20th century.

    A Unitary executive and Signing statements are the fashion these days…

  • “I just want to see Cardinal Richelieu, er, I mean Karl Rove…” – Tom Cleaver

    Now Tom, don’t compare Richelieu with Rove. The real Richelieu was not like your disneyfied character played by Tim Curry. He was a competent person with real human qualities (he wrote plays, for instance) who far exceeds Rove in stature and importance.

    I mean Tom, don’t you respect playwrights 😉 ???

  • Just a reminder, we haven’t won anything yet. It looks good but it isn’t a sure thing. Remember how disappointed we all were when we only found a Scooter under our Fitzmas tree?

    Focus on winning on November 7th, Then on November 8th, if we win, we can start to think about how we and BushCo will handle the new balance of power.

  • I suppose I can see GWB trying to work with selected Dems if that’s his only option. In Texas, his mentor was Democratic LG Bob Bullock, and he got on okay with the (then) Dem-controlled Legislature. And Democrats by their nature want to work together to get things done. On the other hand, Bush and Company have been such a collective horse’s ass these past 6 years, he will have to be excruciatingly charming to get Dems to work with him.

  • I am just dreaming about Marshmallow (Karl) Boy in prison with a huge ugly boyfriend.

    Comment by Bonnie

    Well Karl has been the leading exponent of up is down and no doesn’t mean no. So you have an image of him upside down yelling “NO!” ?

  • Dale, his lips may be saying “no”, but ……… Damn, if you have to drag people physically to voting places, please do and let my dream come true!

  • “The question then becomes, of course, what exactly would the White House do for its final two years.”

    Hopefully spending a lot of time learning the actual meaning of the word “accountability”.

    I would love it if the Bushites actually learned how to piece together a rational policy on any subject. However, these assholes only seem capable of rhetoric disguised as policy that advances either their own political or financial goals, so I really do not see any hope for them.

  • “I suppose I can see GWB trying to work with selected Dems if that’s his only option. In Texas, his mentor was Democratic LG Bob Bullock, and he got on okay with the (then) Dem-controlled Legislature.” Scott

    I recollect that the legislation that was passed in Texas during Bush’s reign was largely what was already on the legislative docket of the Democratic legislature when Bush was elected. Bush, in a very weak constitutional supporting role as governor had a pretty easy ride of it. He gained the “bipartisan” tag, but I doubt if this would translate on the national scene where kisses don’t go too far, except in Connecticut. A lot of Democrats will be showing Bush their asses instead of their cheeks and vice versa.

  • I think Bush and the Repub media must all be looking forward to having a better target than Bill Clinton to blame for everything that goes wrong. The Congress.

  • “The question then becomes, of course, what exactly would the White House do for its final two years.”

    Be a shining example of the phrase “rats fleeing a sinking ship”.

    They’d put it in the dictionary as a picture. Rove et al running out the gate while some 41 retreads have to come in a clean up the mess they left.

  • And then in 2008, sic the IRS on Robertson, Falwell, Dobson, Perkins, and the rest of the American Taliban. Let them lose what’s really important to them: their money.
    —Comment by Tom Cleaver —

    I am particularly fond of that idea, but why wait until 2008? Maybe we can do that sooner. Perhaps next year! I also like the idea of prosecuting war profiteering at the highest levels, it just sounds like an outcome we all wish for. Maybe Cheney will croak on TV; that would occupy the minds of the 24/7 news fiends for days.

    To be serious though, we have not won anything yet. We do not have control of Congress yet, and W is still the President with extra-ordinary power. Never count these people out because they are dangerous animals who could get even more dangerous if they are cornered.

    By the way, if we are setting a legislative agenda, what about universal health care. Perhaps it’s my age but it is sure worrying a lot of my friends and neighbors. We have the stupidest system in the world; isn’t it time to fix it?

    • Comments are closed.