-Caveat Lector- >From http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1247449
The travails of George Bush It's the economy, boss Jul 25th 2002 >From The Economist print edition George Bush is losing control of the American political agenda Reuters CAN it really be happening again? A decade ago, George Bush senior let a seemingly simple re-election slip out of his grasp, as economic problems and a perception that the president was out of touch obscured his triumphs abroad. Now the son for whom that defeat was a cataclysmic experience also appears to be drifting, as the war against terrorism has given way to corporate scandals, falling stockmarkets and the idea that a rich Republican president is out of touch. George Bush junior is not in as bad a fix as his father was�not least because he does not face re-election for another two-and-a-half years. But he is still in a fix. The man who promised to clean up Washington, DC, now finds his press conferences dominated by corporate shenanigans at Harken Energy (where he was a director) and Halliburton (where Dick Cheney was boss). His reaction to America's �crisis of capitalism� has been derided as meek. His attempt to calm the stockmarkets has failed. His huge tax cut has helped push the government into deficit. Abroad, his allies have sniped at Mr Bush about his policies towards Afghanistan, Arafat and agriculture (just to name things beginning with A). The Democrats now talk confidently of taking back the House of Representatives in the November mid-term elections, giving them control of Congress (see article). It would be foolish to be certain of this: the Republicans might, for instance, lose the House but regain control of the Senate, where local personalities matter more. But the fact that voters will receive their ravaged 401(k) pension statements in October will not help Mr Bush's troops. Even without a Democratic Congress, the legislative agenda seems to be slipping away from the conservative ideals he once trumpeted. All the current proposals seem to be about increasing the scope of government. Of course, some of the new bureaucracy stems from security measures; but the shift to bigger government ranges from prescription drugs to farmers. The notion of Mr Bush now steering through anything with the scope of his tax cut or his education bill seems remote. All in all, the impression is of a presidency on the defensive�and considerably smaller than it once seemed. This unflattering image is partly a trick of perspective. Back when Mr Bush began his presidency, the idea that he might lose control of Congress in the mid-term elections was close to accepted wisdom. Presidents tend to get clobbered after a couple of years; Ronald Reagan bounced back emphatically from a poor result in 1986, Bill Clinton from a catastrophe in 1994. Only a year ago, Mr Bush was in a pickle, after the defection of Senator Jim Jeffords handed the upper chamber to the Democrats. Step back a little, and the �extraordinary� part of Mr Bush's presidency is not the current downturn in his political fortunes, but the surge that occurred after September 11th. And he still keeps a bit of that shine: even now, his approval ratings remain comfortably positive. Imagine, just for the sake of argument, that the economy were to keep growing and Mr Bush were to depose Saddam Hussein by next summer. In that case, he could well romp to victory in 2004. Politics is about momentum, and for the moment Mr Bush is rolling downhill That is possible. Yet Mr Bush would be foolish to take too much comfort, for two reasons. First, politics is about momentum, and for the moment he is rolling downhill. Though it is easy to imagine him recovering triumphantly from his current predicament, it could also get worse. The economy could follow the stockmarket (see article). The probes into Mr Bush's and Mr Cheney's past could turn up something nasty. The war against Iraq could go badly, or it could be delayed by events in the Middle East, where his current peace �plan� looks ever less adequate. And, second, his current poor showing is not just a matter of political spin; it reflects real disappointments. The disappearing presidency The Economist endorsed Mr Bush two years ago, and we have given strong support to America's war against terrorism. After September 11th, he proved a brave leader, sometimes magnificently patient and determined, surpassing this newspaper's expectations of how he might handle such a crisis. But there have also been disappointments. His economic policy has too often been amateurish and rigid. His fiscal policy still seems to be based on making his gigantic tax cut permanent after 2010 rather than worrying about stimulus now. His trade policy�notably his steel tariffs and farm subsidies�has been discouraging. Abroad, his foreign-policy successes have been undermined by a needlessly self-centred strain: allies have been pointlessly antagonised, domestic lobby groups cravenly indulged (the UN was the target, this week, again �see article). �Gridlock�, with different parties in charge of Congress and the White House, might not be bad for America >From this perspective, �gridlock�, with different parties in charge of the Congress >and White House, might not be bad for America. A Democratic Congress might enlighten a few of his more blinkered urges in foreign policy and may even bring his economic policy into line�though it would be unlikely to help on trade. In a perfect world, Mr Bush would veto Democratic spending splurges, while the Democrats stopped more tax cuts (though they could both indulge the other's weakness). But there are things that Mr Bush plainly needs to do sooner. The priority has to be the economy. Signing a just-passed bill that will regulate auditors more closely (a drive Mr Bush should have led, not resisted) is not enough. As The Economist went to press, the White House was making a belated push to get �fast-track� trade promotion authority through Congress. It is also clear that he needs to change his economic team, which has no steadying figure to match, say, Donald Rumsfeld at defence. Holding the line on spending will be extremely hard, not least because of Mr Bush's own profligacy. And the war against terrorism? This, more than ever, seems the heart of the Bush presidency. Mr Bush has enjoyed wide support at home and abroad, largely because he has generally been seen to be acting in the interests of the whole world. Soon the issue of Iraq will present itself. Any well-founded impression that the timing is governed by domestic political concerns would be ruinous. The Bush presidency can cope with a little fading; it cannot cope with a general perception that it cares only for its own survival. Copyright � 2002 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A<>E<>R + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forwarded as information only; no automatic endorsement + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + "Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut." --- Ernest Hemingway <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
