Bush’s final year
In
a recent phone conversation, an old friend, who is extremely “liberal,” said
that the reason President George W. Bush took us into Iraq was all about oil,
and that the president was only paying off his friends in the oil industry. As
he warmed to the task, my friend of some 35 years launched into a virtual
litany of transgressions that Bush has committed, which quickly turned into an
over-the-top rant.
As
he became increasingly agitated, his hatred of Bush and of conservatives in
general was palpable even over the phone. That’s what I believe is largely at
play in the clamor to impeach Bush; pure hatred, laced with a heavy dose of politics.
But,
for obvious reasons, that’s not going to happen, notwithstanding the hue and
cry from the extreme left to impeach both Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
It may make for good copy and help liberal organizations raise money, but the
likelihood of it actually taking place is absolutely zero.
So,
what is a more likely scenario for Bush during this last year of his
presidency?
He
will continue the fight against Islamic terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan and
elsewhere around the globe. The situation
in Pakistan, where Osama bin Laden is believed to be hiding, will continue to
be of concern, but the current administration will probably not intervene
directly.
Bush
will continue trying to resolve the Israel-Palestine situation without any
significant result. It won’t happen or
it will be an essentially meaningless agreement like the Oslo Accord in 1993,
and Bush will leave office with this intractable problem still unresolved, as
have all the preceding presidents who also tried to tackle it.
While
the president doesn’t have the political muscle at this point to undertake any
major legislative initiatives, he does have sufficient strength to prevent the
Democrats from imposing their own ambitions on the nation, such as immediate
and total withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, raising taxes, or nationalizing
health care.
Bush
will probably propose an economic stimulus package, but in order to get the
votes needed to pass such a bill, it will be larded with a lot of unwarranted
spending.
However,
having disappointed conservatives with his own record of deficit spending, he
will try to use the power of the presidential veto to keep the budget under
some sort of control. The most recent annual appropriations bills contained
11,331 “earmarks, a 426 percent increase over last year … But he (Bush) has
asked his Budget Director, Jim Nussle, to come up with ways not to spend this
money.” (“Congress’ bloated budget should be busted,” by Donald Lambro, Conservative Chronicle, December 31, 2007)
Bush
has been written-off repeatedly by opponents who generally characterize him as
stupid, but he has confounded them so often that one would expect them to
re-think their assumption.
On
the big issues, such as Social Security and health care, there simply is not
enough time left in the remainder of Bush’s term to develop such major
legislation and vet it sufficiently to get anything meaningful passed.
George
W. Bush may be a lame-duck president, but with the continued support of the
Republican minority in congress he will be able to block most of the Democrats’
agenda until he leaves office.
He
still has powerful tools available in the form of executive orders and his veto
power, which I expect he will use to considerable effect.
© 2008 Harris R. Sherline
All Rights Reserved
NOTE:
Read more of Harris Sherline’s commentaries on his
blog at “opinionfest.com.”