Bush is winning again with his do-over strategy that is so successful that Democrats no longer function as an opposition party and Republicans let Bush loyalty trump their duty to all Americans. But the end game of this particular NSA do-over is that the Congress will usurp executive branch power to pardon Bush. After all of Bush’s chest-thumping of his unitary executive theory and power grabs of congressional and judicial functions, it is indeed ironic that Bush’s exit strategy from this mess is a deal for Congress to exempt Bush from any punitive measures for his illegal acts.
As both child and adult, Bush has insisted that he is entitled to a do-over if he is losing at a game, transaction or event. Bush’s primary do-over strategy is to just change the rules or force his opponent to continue past the end of the game, transaction or event until such time as Bush could eventually win.
Even if he loses, his friends say, he doesn’t lose. He’ll just change the score, or change the rules, or make his opponent play until he can beat him. “If you were playing basketball and you were playing to 11 and he was down, you went to 15,” says Hannah, now a Dallas insurance executive. “If he wasn’t winning, he would quit. He would just walk off…. It’s what we called Bush Effort: If I don’t like the game, I take my ball and go home. Very few people can get away with that.” So why could George get away with it? “He was just too easygoing and too pleasant.”
In November 1992, Bush and Betts were in Santa Fe to host a dinner party, but they had just enough time for one set of doubles. The former Yale classmates were on opposite sides of the net. “There was only one problem–my side won the first set,” recalls Betts. “O.K., then we’re going two out of three,” Bush decreed. Bush’s side takes the next set. But Betts’s side is winning the third set when it starts to snow. Hard, fat flakes. The catering truck pulls up. But Bush won’t let anybody quit. “He’s pissed. George runs his mouth constantly,” says Betts indulgently. “He’s making fun of your last shot, mocking you, needling you, goading you–he never shuts up!” They continued to play tennis through a driving snowstorm.
His entire business career was continual do-overs. After each business acquisition failed due to his incompetence, Father Bush’s friends were there to bail out Bush Jr., and give him another company or business venture. And the do-over cycle repeated.
As President, when Bush says he is taking responsibility for something, what he really means is that it is time for a do-over. For Bush, taking responsibility means taking rhetorical responsibility or simply uttering the words to produce an intended political effect in accordance with conventional wisdom that the public will forgive an offender and all will be forgotten. When Bush takes responsibility, there are no consequences, no accountability and no ownership of what he has done or failed to do. Instead, he gets a do-over.
On each of the few, big-whopper times that Bush has stated that he is responsible, he then proceeded to follow his childhood do-over strategies.
In December 2005, Bush stated that he was “responsible for the decision to go into Iraq.” But, Bush did not even try to address or fix what has clearly been a failed policy, but commenced his do-over campaign to convince the American people that his decision was correct and we must stay the course in Iraq. Although nearly every decision and action taken by Bush prior and during this Iraq war has been wrong, Bush’s strategy is for everyone to give him a do-over by extending the time that the US stays in Iraq until he gets it right. At this point, getting it right means a politically beneficial way for Bush to save face and declare victory, albeit not the definition of victory he has proclaimed in the past.
Bush also accepted responsibility for the Katrina crisis. Then, Bush changed the rules to add a condition precedent to blame: “If a congressional investigation finds the federal government was at fault in the initial response to Katrina, he would accept responsibility.” However, the public and Congress have not followed the rule of conventional wisdom by forgetting the matter. Instead, Congress responded by drafting a report that actually criticizes Bush’s management, or really the failure to manage, the crisis. By Bush’s own revised rules, he should take responsibility. Now, Bush’s response is to strike “back at critics who administration officials say are unfairly blaming President Bush.” So, Bush will take responsibility, but just don’t blame him.
But, the Katrina do-over is actually part of a chain of do-overs in the area of protecting Americans from terrorist activity and natural disasters. This means fulfilling government’s role to prevent such events while also preparing for managing the actual crisis or events that nonetheless occur despite the best efforts at prevention. Bush promised during the 2000 campaign to protect America and be strong on national security. Yet, the Bush administration failed to take seriously the numerous warnings about al-Qaeda planning to strike in the US. After 9/11, the American people and Congress gave Bush a do-over to protect us in the future. After 4 years of promises and billions of dollars spent on preparation for national crisis management of terror attacks and environmental disasters, Katrina hit the US and Bush was neither prepared nor present for managing the crisis. Bush was busy looking at guitars and traveling across the country while people were dying in New Orleans much as he was busy reading a child’s book and then flying across the country while people were dying in New York City on 9/11.
And, now we have Bush’s illegal NSA surveillance of Americans. Bush executed an oath to defend and protect the US Constitution. In this case, Bush did not just change rules, he violated the Constitution. In this Orwellian world that we now live in, Nixon goes on TV to proclaim that he was “not a crook” of the Watergate scandal, and he is subject to impeachment hearings. Bush goes on TV to admit that he violated the Constitution and FISA, and not even a peep on impeachment. Rather, as CNN correspondent Jack Cafferty sarcastically remarked, who cares if our rights our continually violated by Bush, “Just do it.”
“Who cares about whether the Patriot Act gets renewed? Want to abuse our civil liberties? Just do it.
Who cares about the Geneva Conventions. Want to torture prisoners? Just do it.
Who cares about rules concerning the identity of CIA agents. Want to reveal the name of a covert operative? Just do it.
Who cares about whether the intelligence concerning WMDS is accurate. Want to invade Iraq? Just do it.
Who cares about qualifications to serve on the nation’s highest court. Want to nominate a personal friend with no qualifications? Just do it.
And the latest outrage, which I read about in “The New York Times” this morning, who cares about needing a court order to eavesdrop on American citizens. Want to wiretap their phone conversations? Just do it. What a joke. A very cruel, very sad joke.”
The very sad joke on us all continues. Bush violates the law, and instead of impeachment or even public debate, Congress wants to take action to retroactively validate the NSA surveillance and clear Bush of any blame or legal responsibility. In essence, Congress wants to retroactively legalize his illegal actions. The Congressional answer to being declared irrelevant by Bush is to prove just how meaningless Congress is by working out a deal on Bush’s terms to avoid the need for Congress to probe Bush violating the law. The irony is that if Congress absolves Bush of legal responsibility, then it will be performing the executive function of granting Bush a pardon. Wonder if that is allowed under Bush’s unitary executive theory.
Seems like if Congress can not truly hold Bush accountable for any of the “mistakes” that Bush has made, if it finds that it just can’t win with this do-over Bush, then maybe Congress needs to check with Bush’s friends to see if anyone has any advice on how to prevail with the do-over man.
