Lee Hamilton could be forgiven for feeling a measure of smug satisfaction. Eight months after he saw his Iraq Study Group report ”“ a bipartisan prescription to end the Iraq war ”“ rejected by the White House and both parties on Capitol Hill, its recommendations are now being embraced across Washington.
But Mr Hamilton, the Democratic co-chairman of the commission, is a deeply worried man. Just as the group’s plan for a phased withdrawal of US troops receives the political consensus and respect its authors sought eight months and nearly 20,000 deaths ago, it faces failure again: this time victim of a gridlocked Congress and a President still powerful enough to run the war without constraint.
“Time is running out,” he said of the chance for a deal between Republicans and Democrats that could force Mr Bush’s hand. Speaking to The Times, Mr Hamilton added: “It’s very, very tough to turn a president around if he’s stubborn enough. The Iraq Study Group is the only bipartisan report that charts a responsible exit. But the President can hold it off through most of his term.”
From his entry into Texas politics, Bush has shown a tendency to (1) be overly confident in his own ability to read people (2) surround himself with people who share his love for his own judgment.
Bill Bullock, the original Cheney to Bush’s then governor, once paraphrased Ouida in describing this: “Obstinate is no word for it, for he is mulish”
Bob,
And he was probably elected because the American public had grown tried of the “leading by opinion poles” approach by the former one. I note his wife has a similar tendency.
Probably the next president will be elected as a balance of the two; a pragmatist with ideals who also has a history of actually getting things done. A former mayor of New York looks good. We shall see ..
Maryland Brian
MD Brian – one irony of the Bush myth of not leading by opinion polls – Karl Rove has admitted to spending 7-8 times the Dems in polling in the 2000 & 2004 election cycles.
Bob,
Right … he’s following the opinion polls on the war in Iraq. You just can’t make this stuff up …
MD Brian
MD Brian, I was very clear to say there polling was high in election cycles.
Bob,
Clever, but off topic. OTOH, I will infer your non-answer as admitting that the previous president “lead by opinion polls” rather than consistently taking principled stands based on some sort of internal compass. I granted you the notion that the current president is “stubborn” on Iraq.
I think the American public is demonstrating their lack of support for either approach. We went from one extreme to the other and it seems obvious to me that neither approach will win in 2008.
What is disappointing is the article’s lack of analysis concerning Congress’ actions the last few months. The American public seems even more disappointed in them.
MD Brian
You know, the Democrat anger that is expressed towards Bush really has nothing to do with the Iraq War.
They are angry because in a very very very close election, Bush won. By the way, I am and Independent and have been for many years prior to the current president’s two runs for office.
That’s it, plain and simple.
If there had not been a 9/11, an Iraq War or whatever, they would still hate him and attack him.
If there had been an extremely severe drought throughout the past five years, the Democrats would be attacking Bush for not handling the drought well.
The Democrats have a short memory. They forget that JFK’s election was very very close and that there was very very good reason tto assert that corruption in the state of Illinois handed the election to JFK. What did Nixon do? He gracefully, for the good of the country engaged in an extemely dangerous Cold War, refused to contest what appeared to be serious political corruption in Illinois.
AnglicanFirst, your mind reading skills are astounding ! Really – how will win in 2008 ?
I do not hate Mr. Bush or his Regime – I do hate many of their policies, their incompetencies and the manner in which they have divided a country sorely in need of unity. I do not hate Mr. Bush or his Regime – but I do hate the way he decided, against the council of his military, to cut & run from the war with radical Islam in Pakistan & Afghanistan in order to follow a fool’s errand in Iraq. I do not hate Mr. Bush or his Regime – but I do hate he has mishandled (not aa severe drought) but a massive hurricane, ignoring the cries of fellow Americans and bungling the re-building of a grand city.
Mr. Bush is a fellow Christian and lived most of his life in my home state Texas – I could never bring myself to hate him. I think that many Democrats, Republicans and Independents hate what Mr. Bush & his Regime have done to the country we all love so much.
It is not that Bush is stubborn, it is what he is stubborn about that is the problem.
You people are all missing the forest for the trees. We’re in a war with a fundamentalist radical regime [ not Bush’s ] that wants to kill us all. Get over yourselves. Who cares whether you think Bush is stuuborn. One man’s “stubborn” is another’s ” tenacity”. Suggest you all read some of what Lincoln encountered in his war – it took four years before he hired an ex-drunk named Grant to flatten the South into submission.
10
Not sure where Christ’s teaching fits into your scheme.
11. We are to be as gentle as lambs and as wise as serpents. Bush has no “regime”; he has an administration. Bush is hated precisely because he’s Christian. I have heard no articulation in this dialog which attempts to explain the nuances of the situation in, for example, Iraq.