SOTU – Wrap
It could have been worse.
Bush didn’t propose a whole lot of new spending, which is a plus. And what little he did propose has little chance of getting enacted. That’s an even bigger plus.
Leaving aside all the policy stuff – because who really cares this late at night? – what most interested me was Bush’s conciliatory tone. There could be two reasons for it:
1. Bush knows he’s a lame duck.
2. Bush is setting a Conciliation Trap for the Democrats in the midterm election.
Of course, both reasons might be true.
The lame duck angle is worth looking at a little more. Any second-term President is automatically lame, but Bush risks being even duckier than most. The reason, of course, is that there’s not a chance in hell his Vice President is going to run in the next election. Reagan could threaten “four more years” with GHW Bush waiting in the wings. Clinton did the same with Gore – although he could have threatened more loudly. That is, if he and Gore had still liked each other. Or had Gore been an actual member of the human race. Cheney won’t be a contender in ’08 for a variety of reasons – which might help explain Bush’s attitude tonight.
The Conciliation Trap is self-explanatory, but I’ll spell it out for the slower kids. With the notable (and commendable) exception of Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, most of the national-level Democrats don’t come off as very nice people. Bush played nice tonight, and if he keeps playing tough-but-nice until November, it sets up the Republicans for some “nice” victories next fall.
Whatever is going on, we’ll have lots of fun watching it play out over the next nine months.
Cheneys office has a big “WATCH THIS SPACE” billboard sitting right above it. If he finishes the year, it will just stun me.
Whether he is or not, I dont think Bush “thinks” hes a lame duck. He came into office in a position to play that game and even before 9/11, he went on to manage as if he won a Reagan/Mondale sized landslide. I think hes just playing that old southern gentlemans game of “Im just an old country boy, please be my friend” again. Bush has no intention of taking his foot off the pedal now. This year, if the Senate changes hands, Bush will almost certainly face impeachment for no other reason than the Democrats desperate need to get even for Clinton. I suspect hes going to fight this year as hard as he ever has before. Why? This is it. This is the last one. Mile 20 of the marathon. If he makes it through the 2006 election without a change in the Senate or House, its legacy time for the next two years.
and thats where “Uncle Dick and his faulty ticker” comes in. (hmmm, might keep that one for a garage band name…)
I’ll say this for Bush, he’s not boring.
Its also funny to watch how he has evolved in the eyes of his enemies. in 2001 – pre-9/11 he was the dumbest 2 footed mammal to ever walk the earth. Now hes no longer dumb, but pure “evil”. Saddam aside, you usually cant be dumb and evil at the same time. Evil takes smarts, I admit its not much of a concession from the left, but I’ll take it. I wonder if the next step is right to “statesman-like” the way they did with Nixon. You know Bush is going to Vietnam this year, you never know…
uh. but i like dick…
Bush’s State Of The Union: Marking Time or Noting Realities?
Few pundits are hailing President Bush’s State of the Union speech last night as a major watershed in his Presidency. It’s not being called a failure but it’s not being called an inspiring home run, either.
The question becomes: with a Pre…
The Real State Of The Union
Keeping with my previous promise, I did not watch last night’s State of the Union address and, after reading through the transcript of the speech, I can only say that I’m glad that I didn’t. Three-quarters of the speech is, as always, pure bunk; ……
Bush is laying the trap. I’m sure he thinks the Dems have overplayed their hand with Alito — they’ve gone too far to the Kos side — so he can grap the middle by offering his hand in bipartisanship. If the Dems don’t take it, then they’ll look even more obstructionist without an alternative agenda. You don’t want that in an election year.
The Dems would have to grab both Houses to have a chance at impeachment (& removal – only the HoR can impeach), but there will still be biases against it. Even with majority opposition neither Johnson nor Clinton got removed.
Frank
Your comments about the left’s perception of Bush’s intelligence got me thinking about one of the things I’ve always found fascinating about the (mostly) fringe left. Screams of “Bush is an idiot” followed by “Bush masterminded 9/11.” Somehow, we’re supposed to believe that while Bush is too stupid to tie his own shoes, he can assemble a grandiose scheme involving goverment mass murder of 3,000+ civilians and starting two wars (insert cries of “genocide!” here) to do…what exactly? Steal oil? It reminds me of something Glenn said on Instapundit: (paraphrasing, can’t remember the exact quote)”Whatever you think of Bush, you have to admire his ability to drive his opponents insane.”
My reaction to the SOTU address
My reaction to President Bush’s State of the Union address is pretty simple: he was stronger in speaking about foreign policy issues, weaker when speaking about domestic policy issues. Charlie Gibson of ABC News noted that presidents become mo…
Pardon me for picking a nit here but why do you apply the term “lame duck” to Bush? As I understand it, lame duck orginated as a term for a politician who was serving out the last days of his term in office after failing to win reelection. And so, having been both rejected by the voters and soon to be out of office, had zero power. Not Bush’s situation at all (as I see it.)
John F. Why are you trying confuse these folks with facts?
Stephen,
If you’re going to take the time to explain the Conciliation Trap to your readers, there’s no reason to insult the ones who need it explained. Now, I understand you’ve had some martinis, but either don’t explain it because you expect your readership to understand it (which is fine) or be nice about it.
To tefta:
I made the comment I did because, having read Mr. Green’s blog for some time, I know he can give an intelligent response to a civil comment. A form of dialogue I prefer to the more prevalent snarkfest.
Bush’s State-Of-The-Union: Marking Time or Noting Realities?
Few pundits are hailing President Bush’s State-Of-The-Union speech last night as a major watershed in his Presidency. It’s not being called a failure but it’s not being called an inspiring home run, either.
The question becomes: with a Pre…
Democratic contenders not nice? What about Mark Warner?
“As I understand it, lame duck orginated as a term for a politician who was serving out the last days of his term in office after failing to win reelection. And so, having been both rejected by the voters and soon to be out of office, had zero power. Not Bush’s situation at all (as I see it.)”
That’s the old traditional meaning. Nowadays, the meaning has expanded. IME when the end of a person’s position is psychologically real to people, their power declines (irrespective of their abilities, previous success or popularity).
With no heir apparent, the end of Bush’s second term is becoming/has become psychologically real for many in WDC and he doesn’t have near the political capital he maybe once had. I don’t think he has long electoral coat-tails either.
On the other hand, he’s much better at electioneering than governing so he might be able to help his party keep all branches of government. But even if that does happen, he’s going to be mostly pushed aside as the behind the scenes battle for control of the party begins in earnest.
Mr. Farris
I take your point about the looser definition of “lame duck” now in use. Though I still prefer the precision of the original usage. And I think you are correct in saying that with the end of Bush’s term in sight his dominance in the party is, to a degree, weakened. On the hand, he still has almost three years to serve and, not having to worry about reelection, he has the option of making some bold moves, if he chooses to.
As to his coattails, we shall see. Given the highly gerrymandered state of the House nowadays, I don’t think the length of anyone’s coattails count for much.
It really won’t matter if the Senate changes hands in 2006 w/r/t impeaching Bush. The House won’t change hands and the House has to vote to impeach and the Senate then sits as jury in the trial.
john f.
i agree completely re:lame duck usage. words and terms have meaning. and i believe that the current misuse of the term in question is a function of a) the msm not having a clue as to the correct meaning of the term and b) an attempt to create news by claiming the president is weaker than he really is. he was pronounced a lame duck immediately on re-election.
as for the erroneous (in my opinion) usage by mr. green, i can only assume that by constant misusage the current definition has come to include one who can’t be re-elected. which leads me to wonder how a senator -for example- who is a lame duck (by the old definition) would be referred to in the msm?
JW:
Republican = lame duck
Democrat = Distinguished Statesman who has chosen not to run again and whose wisdom will be missed in the Senate.
Perhaps a more apt analogy than “lame duck” would be “retiring quarterback.”
He’s gonna retire after the season ends, but for now he’s still playing in the big games and the team and its fans still listen to him, even as they speculate on who’ll get the job next season.
rbj
Nice one. You are clearly a careful student of the language of the MSM.
re: no one waiting in the wings to threaten “four more years.”
Are you sure? Some of my leftist friends in the bay area are convinced that when Ms. HRC runs (even if she loses in the primary), just her presence will deflate the otherwise appropriate label of “dynasty” when Jeb runs (and wins.) If she doesn’t run, then the President IS a lame duck. But since she hasn’t said she won’t run (and is unlikely to say it until too late), the dems in congress have to behave as if they face their own 40 years in the desert.
Concilitary tone??? Were we listening to the same SOTU speech?
He tore the dems a new one a half a dozen times.
As for a lame duck, forgetaboutit. He’ll continue to put conservatives on the bench, pursue victory in Iraq, make the tax cuts permanent and if the R’s can hold their own in the ’06 election, I wouldn’t be surprised to see SS reform brought up again.
MR. PRESIDENT, PLEASE FOLLOW THROUGH
President Bush’s State of the Union speech was a pleasant surprise. However, anxious voters won’t be happy until they see results from our leaders in Washington.
John F. / tefta
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=lame%20duck
lame duck
n.
1. a. An elected officeholder or group continuing in office during the period between failure to win an election and the inauguration of a successor.
b. An officeholder who has chosen not to run for reelection or is ineligible for reelection.
2. An ineffective person; a weakling.
lame duck
An elected officeholder whose term of office has not yet expired but who has failed to be re-elected and therefore cannot garner much political support for initiatives. For example, You can’t expect a lame duck President to get much accomplished; he’s only got a month left in office. This expression originated in the 1700s and then meant a stockbroker who did not meet his debts. It was transferred to officeholders in the 1860s. The Lame Duck Amendment, 20th to the U.S. Constitution, calls for Congress and each new President to take office in January instead of March (as before), thereby eliminating the lame-duck session of Congress.
Source: The American Heritage
No offense guys, but when you’re quibbling about something as petty as someone labeling Bush a lame duck (when he pretty much is I might add) the SOTU speech must have really sucked bad.
With that said, I’m sure we disagree politically, but I really enjoyed your comments Frank Martin. Very interesting read to say the least.
Though I should note that I don’t think Bush is evil. I still very much think he is “the dumbest 2 footed mammal to ever walk the earth”. The man in an icompetant buffoon.
Now you want to talk about evil? That’s Mr. Dick “Go Fuck Yourself” Cheney.
“Torture is an American value.”
That guy give gives me the willies.
*incompetant
Dave,
Thanks for history of the term “lame duck”. Always good to learn a bit more.