Friedman doesn't get it
Just shaking my head this morning. Thomas Friedman's column says that George Bush is only catering to the far right, not because he is a right-wing idealogue, but because Dick Cheney isn't running for President.
So you see, it's Cheney's fault his boss is such an ass. The only problem is, Friedman asserts, is that Dick Cheney isn't running, therefore George has no incentive to govern from the center. Excuse me? When has Bush ever governed from the center? His is an administration whose "my way or the highway" approach has worked so far, so why should he change? George Bush reminds me of a five-year-old who knows that if he just keeps bugging his mom for candy, ("Mom! Mom! Mom! C'mon, please, please, please...Mom....I want it. Mom!! Mom!!!") that sooner or later she will just get weary of the whole thing and give him the candy, all the while vowing that next time she won't be cowed. Until the next time, that is. And George knows this. Friedman seems to think that if there were someone else whose fortunes Bush was concerned with that certainly he would be more prudent in his governance and that he would actually tack to the center and really work on solving our national problems. Oh Thomas, Thomas, Thomas. It just isn't so. For George, it's always about him. No one, not even Dick Cheney, is of consequence to him.
Submit To Propeller
Tweet
No, George Bush has a different V.P. problem. It is the fact that his vice president has made clear that he is not running for president after Mr. Bush's term expires in 2008. So Mr. Bush has no heir apparent. And that explains, in part, why his second term is drifting aimlessly, disconnected from the problems facing the country.
"If President Bush had a vice president, or someone who was clearly designated as heir apparent to his administration, [the president] would have a more immediate incentive to widen his political base, to offer policies that would appeal more to the center," argued Don Baer, a former senior adviser to President Clinton. But if one looks at the sorts of policies that Mr. Bush has chosen, or not chosen, for his second term, it suggests that Mr. Bush "is not thinking of the bigger implications" for three years down the road, Mr. Baer added.
So you see, it's Cheney's fault his boss is such an ass. The only problem is, Friedman asserts, is that Dick Cheney isn't running, therefore George has no incentive to govern from the center. Excuse me? When has Bush ever governed from the center? His is an administration whose "my way or the highway" approach has worked so far, so why should he change? George Bush reminds me of a five-year-old who knows that if he just keeps bugging his mom for candy, ("Mom! Mom! Mom! C'mon, please, please, please...Mom....I want it. Mom!! Mom!!!") that sooner or later she will just get weary of the whole thing and give him the candy, all the while vowing that next time she won't be cowed. Until the next time, that is. And George knows this. Friedman seems to think that if there were someone else whose fortunes Bush was concerned with that certainly he would be more prudent in his governance and that he would actually tack to the center and really work on solving our national problems. Oh Thomas, Thomas, Thomas. It just isn't so. For George, it's always about him. No one, not even Dick Cheney, is of consequence to him.
Submit To Propeller
Tweet
posted by cls at
6/22/2005
