Well, some morning time to write... but then no time to post, so I lost a day getting this up. On my way to discussing the GOP candidates, I was struck by the stories yesterday and today on the Bush folks and all their recent troubles. And I think one of the things we have to consider is that the Bush Administration has really been innovative in discovering a new self-destructive strategy for responding to scandal - the tough as hell, give no quarter response, that in its unanimity tears everything else apart.
Since Watergate, the notion of Presidency touched by scandal - from Iran/Contra to the Whitewater/Lewinsky saga to the current folks, with lots of mini-scandals along the way - has been pretty constant. And it's led to a lot of discussions of what strategies might work. It's an interestng discussion, because almost none have - from the Nixon folks hiding behind "executive privilege and national security" to the Iran/Contra method of finding a suitable fall guy to the Clinton strategies of making everyone involved look bad, scandals have been pretty much equally damaging (Clinton may have been impeached, but in a process so flawed people still can't agree on what it all means).
To this, the Bush folks have brought an interesting new perspective - a tough as nails refusal to be forced to give up anything, and to refuse to back down in the face of disapproval. That's the real story of Alberto Gonzales, of Paul Wolfowitz, of even things like Harriet Miers and others. Now, as Susan Ralston prepares to testify about her work with Jack Abramoff and Karl Rove, the embattled White House has to deal with scandal coming even closer.
The Bush folks' Stonewall Strategy plays great with the Republican base - at this point, a group of hardcore conservatives who have always felt keen disrespect from the "mainstream, liberal" press they so loathe. All they've ever wanted - ever - is for someone to stand up for their side, for "traditional values" and "decency" as they see it. And they felt, and fell, finally, they've got it in George Bush.
But the problem is that this refusal to give into political realities is tearing the GOP apart - whether it's fiscal conservatives who watch in horror as years of speaking for fiscal discipline is ignored; or principled Republicans who have never cared for the negative social issues of the right; or simply stand-up, ethical folks who disapprove of even a whiff of impropriety (a truly conservative value)... all can take issue with the Bush Administration by now.
In the end, the Bush folks may be right, in a way most people never imagined. Who says you have to answer questions? Who says you have to listen to anyone? Rather than say, "we have nothing to hide" or "we do have something to hide, but it's not a big deal," why not say "hell yeah, we've got something to hide, it's none of your business, and if you keep asking it just proves you're traitors"?
I think official Washington is reeling from the realization - some having reached it in 2004, some last year, some just now - of what a lot of liberals saw a while ago (I will brazenly claim to have known this since the 2000 election): that these folks are serious in their stonewalling. They'll say anything, they'll do anything just to get their way. That's the real lesson of Jim Comey's testimony, why even though it makes Gonzalers look awful, he won't go. It's why Paul Wolfowiz now says "okay, I'll go, as long as we agree I did nothing wrong." It's too late for that, but who cares?
The Bush Administration may never pay for its sins, and we probably all have to face that; but if they don't, no one - especially Republican party leaders - should be surprised if that leads to a Democratic rout in 2008. With few Republicans willing to stand up in a sustained way and take on their President (which I don't necessarily think anyone could expect, really; look how far gone Nixon had to be for Republicans to jump in, or the way Democrats stuck by Clinton even knowing about his affairs and his lying about them), no one is asking within the GOP that someone do better. And with no Bush Administration official in the running in 2008, the current candidates are running against air; it's hard to have a sustained policy argument on current policies when no one, really, is defending them. And I have to say, I'm kind of impressed with the brass balls of the Bush folks - you have to have a lot of fucking nerve to stand your ground like this, and destroy everything that will come after you. It is, in its way, quite impressive.
Comments