But doesn't incompetent government prove that small government is best?

No. It only proves that incompetent government is bad.

I wonder how long they could have gotten away with incompetence, if they hadn't tried to couple it with such spectacular endeavors like Iraq and bureaucractic overreach like politicizing the DOJ.

One of the rare occasions during his presidency in which Bush has actually managed to say something truthful was during the 2004 debates, when he announced his discovery that being president is hard work. Yes, Mr. President, it is hard work. And if your approach to the job is to not give a shit about fucking it up, it is a 100% certainty that you will, in fact, fuck it up.

Worst. President. Ever.

Kis: Hard to say, but incompetence is one of those things that snowballs over time no matter what. For a few years it's not that noticable unless someone like DiIulio blows the whistle, but after a while there's a tipping point where everything is going completely to hell and there's no way to stop it. Iraq made it worse, but I think it would be obvious by now even without it.

This just goes to show that it takes someone with the deep insight and decades of Washington insider experience like Robert Novak to see the ... umm ... obvious.

This begs the real question: why isn't this obvious to Washington press corps and the MSM in general? Are they so overwhelmed by neutrality and objectivity that facts elude them? Or have the fallen victim to super secret dumb rays emanating from hidden transmitted in the West Wing? Or maybe someone is slipping some king of stupid drops into their power lunch martinis.

The mind boggles ...

aa

I think the problem is larger than just Bush. True, he is a sterling example of policy know-nothingism, but he didn't just arrive where he is by accident, and for most of the past six years he has been able to count on rock-solid support from his party.

Are there wonkish republican policy nerds just waiting to take their places in a new republican administration? Is there some batch of deeply knowledgeable policy types lurking either in congress or in righty think tanks? Is there any indication anywhere that some part of the republican party respects honest inquiry and the scientific method?

The questions answer themselves. Both the party and its infrastructure have no interest in policy per se or disinterested inquiry. Instead it is all a great, utterly dishonest multilevel marketing scheme operating to enrich itself and gather as much power as it can. Policy, and any recognizable notion of the common good, have nothing to do with it.

Bush, as bad as he is, will pass. But the republicans we will always have with us, and unless they can transform into an actual political party instead of a criminal conspiracy, the country will be in danger if they have any chance of returning to power.

Well said, Kevin.

In answer to the question, why did it take the mainstream media so long to notice the Bush Administration's incompetence, partly it's because the one thing the Bush Administration is good at -- media manipulation -- is what the media most notices. So, they just assumed that the Administration is doing a similarly crackerjack on its more important responsibilities.

No one could have foreseen that electing an administration that doesn't believe that gvmt can work would generate a gvmt that doesn't work....

As John Legend noted on Realtime with Bill Maher, the Bush administration shows a consistent pattern of valuing loyalty over competence.

But policy analysis shouldn't really be important if you've accepted Jesus Christ as your personal savior; He'll make sure everything comes out right. There is power, wonder-working power, in the blood of the lamb. Iddinit?

The incompetence charge a huge cop out.

If, after deaths of tens of thousands of people in Iraq, after Katrina, after Abu Ghraib, after wiretaps on Americans, all you can do is charge them with incompetence, then they have indeed been very successful in message control. These are not the acts of incompetence, but premeditated frontal assault on all that America should stand for.

Incompetence is the inability to speed up the line at the sandwich shop. Or making me wait for my tax refund for months. It's definitely not what these guys have done.

The Movement Conservative Republican Party runs the party like a corporation, and they market themselves, most effectively, like a corporation.

But the flaw in the ointment is the substance central to that which is being marketed: their product is pure crap. Its based upon flawed ideas. It can't be manifested in a functional way. Its garbage in, Garbage out.

So eventually, like GMs cars, built with flawed, planned obsolence, eventually, the public gets wise, after the contraption breaks down, en masse.

In this case, the Republicans entrusted their delivery to a real flunky who could only make worse, what already was bad. Being a bully makes for a functional politician, but not a functionaly administrator.

The Bush administration couldn't pore piss from a boot if the instructions were written on the heel.

It's gratifying to hear Novak say this, but is his observation as startling as he makes it out to be?

Republicans fancy themselves the party of individual initiative and responsibility. How can they ignore the fact that Bush is a singularly unaccomplished man? He was a mediocre student, poor Guardsman, and a failed Executive. He was debilitated by alcoholic and probably drugs for much of his life. He never learned a skill or trade. He has no remarkable interests or hobbies. His main capability is to use wealth and intimacy with the powerful to get what he wants while avoiding responsibility. Is the Republican party bankrupt, or are they just pretending that they can't see the man? Which is it, Mr. Novak?

gregor >"...These are not the acts of incompetence, but premeditated frontal assault on all that America should stand for..."

Exactly

This is the destination that Americans set course toward w/the election of Ronald Reagan & now we have "arrived". Bush Handlers, Inc. is our payoff.

Certainly one of the stupidest periods in human history.

"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things." - Niccoló Machiavelli

I don't think anyone would deny that Novakula has good sources in Republican circles. It's been he talks about Democrats that he is suspect. Molly Ivins(bless her soul), was warning us for a long time about Chimpy McFlightsuit and his crew. People ignored her warnings at their peril. Anyone with half a brain could have seen the Republics didn't give a damn about policy. Whenever they were questioned on anything, they never had a good answer, they answered every question by attacking Democrats, calling them un-american or baby killers or other 3rd grade playground taunts. Their whole idea was to run the government into the ground. Didn't Grover Norquist say that he wanted to drown the government in a bathtub? It's exactly what the Bush junta is trying to do.

Its worth pointing out, that the last time the Republicans ruled without impunity, it ended in the Great Depression, ten years of poverty in the U.S., ushering in the rise of Adolph Hitler, World War II, and the Holocaust.

Their product is crap.

No telling what Bush's policies could lead to, but he had the opportunity to be, like Harry Truman, to lead the world in a successful ideological struggle and he pissed on the opportunity.

That the Republicans survived the Great Depression to rule another day, is a testimony to the flaws in America's political culture.

Fool us once, shame on you, fool us twice, well, maybe after being burned twice by these people, they'll go the way of all fascist movements.

Kevin: "Until then, keep your seatbelts fastened."

Why would we do that -- especially when we may soon need to rush the cockpit?

Just as in the Nixon days, the real "I" word will not be on the table until the vice-president is removed from the line of succession.
The country as a whole is done with Bush. What is happening now that the even the elites who enabled him are starting to peel off.
Will this be an intra-elite palace coup (modern style) or will the broader failure that made Bush possible be dealt with?
The existence of blogs like this where we can talk to each other outside the elite-controlled channels will be crucial.

It's not that there wasn't any policy it's just that earnest folk like DiIulio who would have blown the whistle on it had to be kept as far from the true policies as possible.

Refresh my memory: Were there competent people serving in the Reagan administration?

The best word to describe Bush's ability to be in the White House is: Unqualified.

At all levels.

Wonder which company will want to hire him in the future?

Stunning. Do any of you people have the ability to read for comprehension?

Novak isn't saying the DoJ is run by incompetents. He isn't saying the White House is run by incompetents. He's reporting that senior GOP leaders are saying that, and then he explains why they're lying.

The President and this administration are not incompetent. These fuckups are all the deliberate result of a concerted effort to "build out the chaos" as JMM would say. WTF do you people insist on pretending to be stupid?

George Bush's "policy," such as it exists, is to politicize every aspect of government in an attempt to insure that Republicans win elections forever.

Bush and Rove figure that as long as Republicans control the levers of power they can eventually stumble upon solutions to the many, many problems their administrative incompetance has caused.

These people will never compromise, never admit being wrong and never surrender. They need to be replaced as soon as possible before they turn the practice of good government into a joke.

Has anyone considered the impact of this administration's extreme partisanship on the long term ability of government to attract talented civil servants? Who but partisan lickspittles will ever want to work for the government after this?

The truest measure of a political party are the acts and deeds of the government when that party controls the legislative and executive branches (not to mention majority sway on the supreme court).

To elaborate on JimBob's excellent point, the GOP appears to have little interest in policy, truth, procedural integrity (enforcement of laws), science, or even the longterm wellbeing of the nation itself (note the 10 trillion dollar projected reversal in our federal debt, the 'global war against terrorism' not being waged against terrorists, or even competently against Iraqi insurgents, the failure to implement the 911 commission recommendations, Katrina, denying the existence of global warming, etc.). They are only concerned with their own power and self-enrichment and little if anything else.

Sadly, the Democrats squandered their time in the minority and failed to implicate the GOP as a whole as willing enablers and henchmen of this administration. Now that the GOP is no longer controlling the House and Senate, it will be much harder if not impossible to extend the blame beyond the White House.

As Bush's stock sinks, more Republicans will abandon him as a convenient scapegoat for crimes in which they all acted as willing accomplices. The opportunity to reveal the GOP for what it really is diminishes by the day.

If you fire law enforcement officials for blatantly political reasons, but can't convince people that you didn't just fire law enforcement officials for blatantly political reasons, that's not incompetence.

If you try to set up a flourishing liberal democracy in a deeply divided Muslim society with no history of liberalism or democracy, and don't end up with a fourishing liberal democracy, that's not incompetence.

Repeat as necessary.

Novak isn't saying the DoJ is run by incompetents. He isn't saying the White House is run by incompetents. He's reporting that senior GOP leaders are saying that, and then he explains why they're lying.

Actually he doesn't say that at all, but the boldness of that bit of misdirection is nothing compared to your next line:

The President and this administration are not incompetent. These fuckups are all the deliberate result of a concerted effort to "build out the chaos" as JMM would say.

Most trolls deny the fuckups, although in doing so they end up looking pretty pathetic. You, however, don't just admit the fuckups you embrace the fuckups. And you don't go with the usual conclusion, namely that any administration that could fuck things up so badly in so many ways must be massively incompetent. No, you take absurdity to the next level by insisting that the Bush administration is fucking up all over the place, and they know they're fucking things up, and ... they're doing it all on purpose.

Breathtaking. You've taken trollery to new heights. I salute you.

Exactly, Blue Girl. The longest-term damage of this maladministration may be the destruction of the American people's belief that government can be a force for good. Even Reagan could not kill that legacy of FDR, and Clinton did much to restore it, but it'll be along time before anybody puts their faith in government again.

WE TOLD YOU SO

John DiIulio wasnt the only one.....

Bush "was like a blind man in a room of deaf people." - Paul O'Neill - The Price of Loyalty 2004

bush and rove were "smart", they used 9-11 to THEIR advantage...

more so than osama, that's for sure...

O'Hanlon's razor states that one should never impute to malice what might simply be due to incompetence. This has never been a very good rule; even in the Nixon administration there was as much bloody-minded malice as brain-dead incompetence.

The worst thing about this bunch is that it's hard to tell the difference between malice, incompetence, and batshit insanity.

But doesn't incompetent government prove that small government is best?

The inherent dilemma of governing is that a small leadership team is indeed best, however there is quite a bit of governing to do, especially in a nation the size of the US.
Cut back on the governing and entropy takes over killing progress, enlarge the governing body and you get bureaucracy and lose national coherence (people love freedom).

Now, do we want to put Man on Mars or do we want to ensure that everyone can buy a new SUV every 3 years?

I absolutely agree with your analysis, Kevin. But what solution are you offering? More dithering and hand-wringing for another two years? When a senior senator from the opposing party,Chuck Hagel, is talking impeachment, I think the Democrats better re-think what’s “on the table�. And here is more evidence of Karl Rove’s corruption of the workings of government.

Democrats should be focusing like a laser of impeaching Bush and Cheney and throwing lawsuit after lawsuit at Karl Rove, since he is unimpeachable. Unless they do those things, anything else is just re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. They need to take Bush, Cheney and Rove down and do it now!!!

Government is a complex business, and mistakes will always be made. But are you better off than you were eight years ago? Of course you are! Back then we had a president who was having an affair with an intern and lying about it!

We have a government largely unconcerned with governing, a media largely unconcerned with the news, and a public largely unconcerned with civics and voting.

I guess this is what the fall of Rome looked like, or late 19th century Russia looked like, from the inside.

"What is to be done?" -- rebuild from the ground up, on first principles, with missionary zeal. It sucks, but we have to put a big chunk of our lives aside and rebuild our communities and nation.

The next generation will live and die trying to rehabilitate the febrile machinations of the current regime. Not only have we lost our "soft power" worldwide, we've lost faith in ourselves--ruthlessness, power-mad lying and paranoia have become an American trademark. The great optimism of the USA has gone sour.

A few Republicans blame incessant attacks from the new Democratic majority in Congress for that image.

True, Bush certainly has a alot of problems of late but of the last three scandals, only one is a Dem one.

1. Libby conviction - that was Patrick Fritzgerald
2. The Walter Reed incident - (a show case of Bush's lack of policy) that was Dana Priest and the WP.
3. And then blogger Josh Marshall nailed the "loyal Bushies" with the only policy this administrtion every really had - the single political agenda of Karl Rove to rig elections by any means necessary, no matter how illegal or unethical.

And Novak must be kidding right? George W. Bush is alone. In half a century, I have not seen a president so isolated from his own party in Congress

With all that lack of oversight???? Bush was isolated? Bush has had the GOP kissing his royal little Bushie ass every since he's been in office. AND the GOP still do this. Bush did some mighty ugly things with Republicans in complete lock step with him. The GOP didn't care that Bush had no policy, so where the hell is Novak coming from here?

Remember what David Brooks wrote about wonder why he wasn't sitting with Novak and loyal Bushies at at a baseball game in one of his columns. Novak must have gotten the blame for writing all about Ms. Plame and that supposed junkett she sent her husband on to Niger, even if that's exactly what Dick Cheney wanted from Novak, still Novak got expelled from the loyal Bushie skybox club. Novak is writing a petty and vindictive column here.

Novak may have had good sources among Republicans at one time but I seriously doubt he does anymore.

When K. Rove said, "There's a lot in American politics that's up for grabs" what he meant was:

"Americans are so fucking stupid you won't believe what we can get away with."

He was more of less correct, for 6 years anyway.

"I" word? I had a different I-word in mind when I read the headline. ROBERT NOVAK CALLS FOR THE IMPEA.........

While it is true that the country is done with this President and this administration, the country won't support impeachment. It wants Congress to provide adult supervision, force Bush to get some competent people around him and hold on for deal life until the next President is elected. His great flaw is that he never really had to govern in Texas. He rented out the job to his Lt. Governor and he couldn't do the same in Washington. Marketing is no substitute for policy. He thought Cheney and Rumsfeld could run the country for him, but those hard core Nixonites time had passed. Don't forget the role of all those think tanks that influenced so much of their policy. Too many people with great conservative ideas but no day to day hands on practical experience in government or regular people. How else can you decide their brain dead attempts to end Social Security?

> That makes competent governance impossible

The Radical Right has stated in public and consistently for more than 30 years its desire to destroy the federal government. The Radical Right strongly supported George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004.

There was never any intention to have any sort of competent government, nor is there any such intention now. The goal (which has been mostly achieved) was to dismantle the government. Along the way they found that a convenient method was to loot said government and hand the proceeds over to their friends, so they did that too. But destruction was and is the priority.

Much as it hurts me to say so, W is one of the most successful Presidents in US history /if you measure him by HIS goals upon entering office/.

Cranky

bad Jim"The worst thing about this bunch is that it's hard to tell the difference between malice, incompetence, and batshit insanity."

So true, bad Jim, so very, very true!

I think, that ever since the loyal Bushies took the WH in 2000, with the help of the Supremes and Katherine Harris, the US has been in a kind of implicit Constitutional crisis. Our government is founded on the assumption that those who run the USA will honor the Constitution and try to run an effective government for all Americans. However, this has never been the case for Bushco. Bushco has always operated like a oligarchy: Government of the people, by the few, for the few. The Founding Fathers, who thought through so many things so carefully, made provisions in the Constitution for addressing individual malfeasance, but it never occurred to them that a group, a Party, could win an election and still have such such contempt for our Constitution, government and for the interests of all Americans.

The reason why it has taken so many people such a long time to wake up to the reality is because 1) Bushco manipulates the media so skillfully, 2) because they couldn't believe it the truth even when it was in front of their faces, and 3) because even if one knows the truth, it isn't clear what to do about it other than win the next election.

The consititutional crisis is that removing individuals from office will not stop the damage. The entire government--including the judiciary--has been corrupted and we need to clean house. It really is a Herculean task, like cleaning the Augean stables. But we have no constitutional procedures for accomplishing that, except waiting until the next election cycle.

During the Bushco years, I have come to appreciate the flexibility of a parliamentary system.In that case, the gig would have been up for the Bushies in Nov 2006.

"But the republicans we will always have with us, and unless they can transform into an actual political party instead of a criminal conspiracy, the country will be in danger if they have any chance of returning to power." jimBOB (am I the only who hears banjos playing)

Well let's see........

Republicans have won 7 of the last 10 POTUS elections and in that time America has become the most powerful country in the world, both economically and militarily. America continues to lead the world in technology innovations, medical research breakthroughs and renewable energy process's while leading recent humanitarian efforts in Indonesia, Africa and Turkey. Currently the DJIA is at an all time record high, unemployment is at record lows, GDP continues to strong growth (despite an acknowledged bloated gov't), and America is leading the effort in eradicating the recent spate of spree killers that masquerade as Muslims (despite their defenders on the left).

So I guess my opinion differs from the incessant negativity from the left.

aline on March 26, 2007 at 8:06 AM:

Marketing is no substitute for policy.

Exactly. Every policy initiative is another campaign season; it doesn't matter if the product is any good, just that it is purchased. Once that happens, it's off to the next candida..er, policy initiative. It's what his people know.

Just how many people who worked on Dubya's 2000 and 2004 election campaigns hold places in Dubya's administration, anyway?

Too many people with great conservative ideas but no day to day hands on practical experience in government or regular people.

Not that it would matter if they had any practical experience...Ultimately, the neoconservative ideology they follow is flawed in that it is barely applicable to the real world.

"The reason why it has taken so many people such a long time to wake up to the reality is because 1) Bushco manipulates the media so skillfully,....." - PTate

But I thought he was INCOMPETANT?

And do you honestly think GW manipulates Dan Rather, Katie Couric, Chris Matthews, Tim Russert, Keith Olbermann, etc.....?

Jay on March 26, 2007 at 8:30 AM

..am I the only who hears banjos playing

Having that erotic Deliverance fantasy again, Cut-n-Run Jay?

Well let's see..

That doesn't count if you are wearing blinders.

So I guess my opinion differs from the incessant negativity from the left.

Jay's a fan of The Secret. Who knew?

..."Don't forget the role of all those think tanks that influenced so much of their policy.".....
Posted by: aline on March 26, 2007 at 8:06 AM

the acronyms RICO and PNAC look so good together.

Am I dreaming?...or did Robert Novak just come back from the "Dark Side". I never thought I'd ever see him write a column like that.

We are truly living in strange days.

Jay on March 26, 2007 at 8:34 AM:

But I thought he was INCOMPETANT?

PTate said 'Bushco' was skillfull, not Bush himself. Talk about having blinders on...

Don't see how Elmore Leonard could improve on the White House Boiler Room as the Repugs have made Leonard's characters look like pikers and/or saints.

Matthews and Russert are Puppets - The Shrubians are the Puppeteers - They have a 50 week supply of soft beach balls for their Repug guests - Hardballs are only used on Dems on the other two weeks.

But I thought he was INCOMPETANT?

I love the subtle irony of that last vowel.

Jay, as everyone else on the thread seems to realize, they're good at media manipulation, incomptetent at actually governing. Get with the program!

This is PRICELESS. The following are comments from the media when Congress was looking into suspicious foreign campaign contributions. Can you guess who was President?

"Today co-host Katie Couric asked reporter Bob Woodward: “But are members of the media, do you think, Bob, too scandal-obsessed, looking for something at every corner?�

On August 1, even as the Senate moved to subpoena the White House, co-host Matt Lauer professed: “But there aren't any major storm clouds on the horizon for Bill Clinton, other than maybe Medicare reform.� Newsweek's Jonathan Alter replied: “Yeah, but of course there are these possible scandals, but when the economy is doing well, the public really doesn't seem to care much about anything else.�

On October 8, Today co-host Katie Couric framed the hearings for Sen. Arlen Specter: “Perhaps this is an intentional effort to embarrass the Democratic Party?� On the November 7 Today, NBC's Lisa Myers pressed Senator Fred Thompson: “Your hearings clearly reinforced the public's already low opinion of politicians and politics. Beyond that, what did it accomplish?�

"...they're good at media manipulation, incompetent at actually governing. Get with the program!" - Wilbur

Oh I see........they can fool, and manipulate the media and the leaders of the Democratic Party, but are overall incompetent, right?

Well then what would that make the media and the leaders of the Democratic Party?

Gullible?

Naive?

Ignorant?

Ah, yes, beloved Lisa Meyers of "Whitewater is Really, Really, Really a big deal. I'll have more and more and more tomorrow night. It really, really is Tom, why won't anyone believe me. I try so hard, but I'm getting a tad tired of having to eat grits every day just so America will finally understand that Whitewater is a Really, er did I already mention that"

Incompetence and arrogance leave the door open for corruption. This explains the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars in the Bush administration adventures. Since their party benefits so much by the waste, fraud and abuse, it's a virtuous cycle. Kind of makes the "welfare queens" with their Cadillacs small change.

I think first of all that the Bush people don't care about anybody but themselves and their war-profiteering buddies at the Carlyle Group and at Halliburton. Second, I don't think they're entirely incompetent. It's just that the things they focus on don't help the rest of us, so they appear incompetent on those other things like governing.

They're no incompetent, they're just Evil.

The Bush presidency should permanently bury the idea that the president only needs to be a man of sound instincts, that he doesn't also need to be intelligent, learned, and wise. We were assured that Bush's instincts would help him sort out the proper policy from the inevitably divergent advice he'd get from his advisers.

Well, no. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No.

Unless he's taking baths in virgin's blood, Novakula must know that he's not much longer for this sphere--he looks like he's in the early stages of vapor lock as it is--anyway, I don't think he's too worried about burning his sources. He could do a "match" column: match the "incompetant" off-record remarks with the "all-that-is-man" on-record remarks from the same people.

"[republicans blah blah... etc]So I guess my opinion differs from the incessant negativity from the left. "

Jay, that's exactly what they thought in 1928 too.

Today's Repukeliscum Party is the party of looters. They can't do anything, since they are just absolutely incompetent. They can arrange the laws to steal the money from the working and middle class, and that is what they are doing.

1) The Iraq war is a huge set of transfer payments from our children to the defense contractors.

2) They have cut their own taxes, and raised taxes on the middle class. How? By increasing fees and cutting subsidies for college.

3) They have favored big business over small business.

4) The farm programs are again transfer programs of welfare from cities to rural regions.

"Jay, that's exactly what they thought in 1928 too." - Buford

And things have turned out pretty well haven't they?

Compare any other country to America from 1928 to present. I'd bet that America is far and away the leader in economic development, human and civil rights, technological development, and humanitarian aid, among others.

"4) The farm programs are again transfer programs of welfare from cities to rural regions." - POed

You might want to check the recent "war funding" legislation that Pelosi rammed through the House last week. Or as I like to call it, the Farm Subsidy/support the troops legislation. LMAO.

Oh, please settle down, liberals.

You are safe and sound and no one has attacked you for the last five years. If this is what incompetence looks like, give me more of that!

Could it be that this administration has been working around the clock to keep the enemies of America off balance and guessing? Could there be another strategy, other than surrender and appeasement, that is working in the war on terror?

Didn't think of that, did you? Of course not. We see the derangement of liberals and we laugh. And by we, I've been instructed in the proper use of the royal "we" and we are using it properly. And when I refer to "we" I am referring to people like myself, who make up a silent majority of Americans who see all of this as a bunch of nonsense manufactured by an INCOMPETENT media and an INCOMPETENT liberal base. Really, when you think about it--where are the most virulent attacks on Speaker Nancy coming from? Oh, that's right--MoveOn.organization and Code Pinky.

Compare any other country to America from 1928 to present. I'd bet that America is far and away the leader in economic development, human and civil rights, technological development, and humanitarian aid, among others.

Um, you'd lose that bet.

Speaking of incompetence, what does this say about that half of the country that voted this bozo and his circle-jerk of morons a second term long after the incompetence writing was on the wall?

Norman,
How long was it between attacks on the WTC? Bush can't be trusted with anything, so I would put very little stock in your comments.

Normie, be true to your ilk - Remain silent.

Ah, the refrain of Simon and Garfunkle about a certain sound.

Even Reagan could not kill that legacy of FDR, and Clinton did much to restore it, but it'll be along time before anybody puts their faith in government again.
Posted by: Yellow Dog

'And yes, the political system has increasingly been subcontracted out, with malice aforethought, to thieves, looters, cronies, and absolute dopes. Little wonder that Americans, living through the Age of Enron, scanning the horizon from Iraq to New Orleans to Walter Reed Army Medical Center, and watching Halliburton head for Dubai, generally believe their system no longer works; that those high-school civics texts are a raging joke ....; and that, if you took to the streets of the capital, no one in either party would be paying the slightest attention.' - Tom Engelhardt

Speaking of incompetence, what does this say about that half of the country that voted this bozo and his circle-jerk of morons a second term long after the incompetence writing was on the wall?
Posted by: ckelly

That they were bought out by their tiny share of the tax cut bonanza and frankly didn't give a shit who or what had to be fucked over in the process...

'When the era of shared growth ended, so too did much of the growth: the U.S. economy slowed down and recessions were deeper, more frequent, and harder to overcome. Growth spurts that did occur left most people out: the bottom 60% of U.S. households earned only 95 cents in 2004 for every dollar they made in 1979. A quarter century of falling incomes for the vast majority, even though average household income rose by 27% in real terms. Whew!' - James M. Cypher
Who's Gorging and Who's Getting Roasted in the Economic Barbecue?
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/49374/

Did anyone see George Will on Stephanopolis? He argued that Bush should consider replacing Gonzo because he lacks the intellectual agility to successfully defend the aggressive White House positions on the prerogatives of the unitary executive. Doesn't that sound more like the job description of the WH counsel rather than the AG? So, no only has Gonzo never really changed jobs, the rightwing punditocracy never expected him to.

It's simpler than all this, really. The only way progressives can lose is if they play the bad guys' game by the bad guys' rules.

Since Nixon, Republicans have historically won on the three sides to their triangle: better on national security/law and order, better on the economy, and better managers.

Nixon's exploitive "Southern strategy" was generally pretty marginal in the sense that it helped to marginalize Democrats rather than expand the core appeal of the GOP. But it worked well complementing the big three.

Bush may have managed to BREAK all three, particularly their connections. The standard GOP strategy can't work in 2008 unless progressives play their role in it; we can't be FORCED into it this time, can we?

Consider: Reagan was famously optimistic, even funny. He played brilliantly to Carter's weaknesses, without bothering to debate the merits: "There you go again..."

Who can do that for progressives against a Republican candidate next year? Aren't we more likely to have somebody who tries to argue specifics -- and loses on vision?

Reagan was the pure model on national security/law and order; on the economy (cut taxes!); and nobody ever doubted that Reagan's management style was to let somebody competent run things.

There ain't no Jim Baker in Bush's White House, is there?

Iraq alone, not to mention 9-11 happened on Bush's watch, substantially erodes the basic presumption that Republicans are better on national security issues -- UNLESS Democrats are drawn into an argument about it.

Progressives won't want to admit it, but there is a profound alienation from Bush on law and order issues because of the immigration mess.

And every Republican candidate next year is going to try to find some symbolic way to communicate that they can, so, run the Federal government (not like SOME Presidents we know): I half-expect somebody to put a pet cat named Katrina on their campaign plane. In fact, basic competence rather than his war hero status could be Hagel's ace in the hole: the guy bet his savings on creating an enormously successful multi-national.

But, geeze, folks, arguing that Quislings and socialists and the country that gave up Anne Frank are better than us? Do you WANT to lose?

Norman,
How long was it between attacks on the WTC? Bush can't be trusted with anything, so I would put very little stock in your comments.

Seven years. But that was only because they were afraid that a strong Republican president would be elected after Clinton, so they didn't dare attack us here at home. Then after 9/11, they haven't dared attack us here at home again because we now have a strong Republican president at the helm. If they attack before Bush leaves office it will be because they think a weak Democrat president will be elected.

Do I have to tell you liberals everything?

How long was it between attacks on the WTC? Bush can't be trusted with anything, so I would put very little stock in your comments.

You're absolutely right--Clinton had all that time to prevent 9/11 and what did he do? He caused pain in his marriage instead.

What I believe is this--liberals won't stop until George W Bush is forced to divorce his wife in order to keep defending America. Every aspect of these charges that are levelled against him is part of a plot to make him look incompetent and unable to defend America. Once liberals succeed in driving the man's wife to leave him and seek refuge in Crawford in order to avoid the same kinds of hounding that tore at President Nixon, then they'll cry out with triumph.

As many of you know, President Nixon was hounded--day and night--by screaming hippies outside of the White House. As the left wing ratchets up its attacks and starts tormenting this poor man and wife in their own home, those of us who support the President will merely tsk tsk at you and regard you with contempt.

Really. Have you no shame?

With all the huffing and puffing about Republican incompetence, compulsive overmanager and tennis court overseer Jimmy Carter remains the single most incompetent president the Republic has suffered since James Buchanan.

Government is a complex business, and mistakes will always be made. But are you better off than you were eight years ago? Of course you are! Back then we had a president who was having an affair with an intern and lying about it!
Posted by: Al

Worst. Fake. Al. Ever.

'when all's said and done I think that the very first critique from the very first administration apostate is going to turn out to be the one that nailed the Bush presidency's core problem. Ladies and gentlemen, John DiIulio:'

And, Ladies and Gentlemen, Kevin Drum:

"What do we have to look forward to if George W. Bush is elected to a second term? One word: scandal.
...There are three good reasons to think that second terms naturally lend themselves to scandal, and George Bush is almost preternaturally vulnerable to every one of them. Let's count them off."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.drum.html

It's not quite as prescient as the Onion, who with their "Bush: Our Long Nightmare of Peace and Prosperity is Over", managed, in a satirical piece, be more on the money than the entire Washington political pundocracy, but it still was a damned good call by Kevin.

Consider: Reagan was famously optimistic, even funny. He played brilliantly to Carter's weaknesses, without bothering to debate the merits: "There you go again..."

Yes, you're correct. And he was able to say "there you go again" because his people had stolen Carter's debate briefing book. That's why Reagan was a winner throughout history--nothing stood between him and victory.

You talk about playing "games" when, in fact, this is about defending America and beating the living hell out of our enemies. That's not a game, sir. Hence, you lose.

To me it is all a huge rightwing conspiracy, the MSM, MIC and both parties.
The people were manipulated, the journalists knew Bush was not qualified to govern. He failed in all his endeavers, in Texas it was Bullock who ran the show. Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld, all the Neo-cons knew he would do as told as long as he could pretend to be President and could say " I am the leader, war president, decider, I don't have to explain and I don't have to work, I can just fly around in Airforce #1"
A wise leader seeks wise councel.
The Bush people wanted power and loot the nation, and they are competent to do just that.

How powerful the Bush cabal is, the time he was AWOL for a year or two no one has ever come out and said where he was during that time. Where did he live, who knew him and spend any time with him getting drunk or doing anything, did he have dates or what did he do?

If small government is best would no government be better?

Actually, this administration has been VERY competent at implementing its agenda: extending personal wealth, market share and Government access for a few. (Plus, making it difficult for a change in administration to reverse the effects.) They even got re-elected by marketing fear and social/religious conservatism--and then literally phoning in their support (e.g., Right to Life).

These are smart, capable people. They're just not here to govern.

For the latest news, email archives, hearings, legal filings and other essential documents on the Bush DOJ prosecutor firings, see:
"The U.S. Attorney Scandal Documents."

The Republican Congress could have undertaken extensive policy analysis. Right-wing pundits, think tanks, and scholards could have. They could have critiqued the Bush administration proposals and offered counter-proposals.

6 years of encouraging and helping incompetent governance suggests that this problem extends far beyond the Bush administration to the party as a whole. Republican party members should start thinking about that quite seriously. They should start looking to back real experts in the primary. It couldn't hurt to start addressing this.

These are smart, capable people. They're just not here to govern.
Posted by: Sophie in VA

These are at best middling smart but very, very greedy people. They're just not here to govern but to loot.

And they've done a heck of a job of it, too.

Business Week put it bluntly: "Some people will obviously have to do with less... .It will be a bitter pill for many Americans to swallow the idea of doing with less so that big business can have more." The long-range strategy was to cut workforces and their wages, scour the globe in search of cheap labor, trash the social contract and the safety net that was supposed to protect people from hardships beyond their control, deny ordinary citizens the power to sue rich corporations for malfeasance and malpractice, and eliminate the ability of government to restrain what editorialists for the Wall Street Journal admiringly call "the animal spirits of business." - Bill Moyers

Jay: On October 8, Today co-host Katie Couric framed the hearings for Sen. Arlen Specter: “Perhaps this is an intentional effort to embarrass the Democratic Party?� On the November 7 Today, NBC's Lisa Myers pressed Senator Fred Thompson: “Your hearings clearly reinforced the public's already low opinion of politicians and politics. Beyond that, what did it accomplish?�

What did it accomplish, then, Jay?

Rasmussen:

On Iraq, 50% Trust Dems, 38% Prefer GOP

President Bush's performance in Iraq is considered "poor" by 52%, an increase from 49% in February. Just 30% currently say President Bush is doing a good or excellent job in Iraq.

Thirty-nine percent (39%) of American voters believe Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should resign. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of 800 Likely Voters found that 31% disagree and say he should not resign . . . [and 30% are like Jay and have their heads buried in the sand or Bush's ass so far they don't know what's going on in the world.]

I don't think that what DiIulio reveals is really "incompetence". Its not that these people don't think policy analysis is serious business, they just don't think it is their business. They recognize their role as implementing a policy agenda crafted outside of government. Policy analysis in government, where it might become public, especially by people who haven't bought wholly into the idea of government serving only the narrow elite that this administration represents, serves only to shine unwelcome light.

This administration takes public, objective policy analysis very seriously: that is, they view it as a very serious threat, and therefore are devoted to stamping it out. They are incompetent, if at all, only in overestimating their ability to get away with that: then again, they've made it through most of their two terms, and if the idea is widely held that their problem was incompetence rather than malevolence, allowing the future election of a similarly oriented administration so long as they project, in advance, an air of competence, well, then I'm not so sure they will have overestimated anything at all.

They recognize their role as implementing a policy agenda crafted outside of government. Policy analysis in government, where it might become public, especially by people who haven't bought wholly into the idea of government serving only the narrow elite that this administration represents, serves only to shine unwelcome light. - cmd

Precisely.

'By the time World War II was over, we had become the middle-class society that the baby boomers in this audience grew up in. We had become a much more equal society. That high degree of equality began to go away -- depending on exactly which numbers you look at -- during the late 70's, maybe a little earlier than that. And at this point we're basically back to pre-tax and transfer to the levels of inequality that we had in 1929.' - Paul Krugman

theAmericanist:
But, geeze, folks, arguing that Quislings and socialists and the country that gave up Anne Frank are better than us? Do you WANT to lose?

Quisling? That was 1940, bud. During the German invasion.

Anne Frank? That was 1944. One informer does not a country make.

And the Scandinavian model of social democracy was very successful in bringing peace and progress to its citizens even as the business community prospered. Only a few far-right cranks would argue against this.

If your beloved Republicans had as much concern for the US and its people as you're showing here to us poor, benighted liberals, the country might have a chance of salvaging something positive from the present travesty.

Quisling? That was 1940, bud. During the German invasion. - skegmongrel

Further Quisling (a real person BTW) did not operate in the Netherlands.

The I-word is IMPEACH.

Purgegate: Holding a Mirror to Soviet Style Thuggery
.
A Commissariat in action:

Political appointees oversee science (FDA & global warming) in this administration.

Political appointees botch, bungle and butcher Iraq reconstruction and Katrina relief.

Political appointees are sent into the CIA executive suite for a political cleansing mission.

Political appointees set up a propaganda office in the DOD to deliberately and maliciously mislead the nation into war while refusing to plan for known obstacles ultimately leading to thousand of troop' deaths and injuries.

The hue and cry over Purgegate is that the Justice Department has traditionally been significantly and honorably immune to rank political interference. Not under our presently governing thugs.

Despoiling democracy and honor while emulating a Soviet/Communist Commissariat model government is the operational and ethical basis of Gonzalez and his handlers.

Good news. If politicizing the Justice Department finally brings out the backbones of our legislators, Republican and Democratic alike, shout hosannas. Citizens of the entire planet sincerely want the America that strives for honor, honesty and equal treatment under the law to reappear.

Craig Johnson

Labels: Bush, Cheney, commissariat, communism, gonzales, Purgegate, soviet

No. It only proves that incompetent government is bad.

Yup. Why anyone would expect that people that have contempt for government in general could run a competent government is beyond me.

The I-word is IMPEACH.
Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld

Hear! hear!

Given Purgegate, there are inevitable comparisons between Bush and Nixon. What Novak is doing, however, is drawing an important distinction. Nixon's criminal instincts notwithstanding, government was still competent. As noted in these comments, "incompetence" under Bush is one part nihilism and another part ideological conceit. This is the end-stage of a revolution that begun with Reagan. It is finally devouring its young.

It's been a heady run for the far right. Has there ever been a period in American history where extremists seized control of the government for such an extended period?

Republicans have won 7 of the last 10 POTUS elections

There is more than a little reason to believe that is closer to 5-5.

and in that time America has become the most powerful country in the world, both economically and militarily.

I am not as optiomistic as you are about the economy, and on the military, you are flat out wrong. This administration has devastated the military and if a real threat cropped up, we would be hard pressed to deal with it, and it would take longer and cost more lives. The DoD says so. Look it up if you don't believe me. The modern Republican party has been the absolute worst thing that has ever happened to the U.S. Army and Marine Corps.

America continues to lead the world in technology innovations, medical research breakthroughs and renewable energy process's while leading recent humanitarian efforts in Indonesia, Africa and Turkey.

What innovations would you be referring to? Would you mind citing the statistics for relief spending? Since you brought it up, it is incumbent upon you to back up your assertions.

Currently the DJIA is at an all time record high,

After losing ground immediately after Bush took office and recovering to the Clinton-era levels within the last six months or so.

So I guess my opinion differs from the incessant negativity from the left.

Proving that you are either uneducable or insane.

Has there ever been a period in American history where extremists seized control of the government for such an extended period?
Posted by: walt

Reconstruction and its aftermath. aka 'The Gilded Age'. aka 'the Great Barbeque' as Sam Clements named it.

Purgegate: Holding a Mirror to Soviet Style Thuggery

Been saying for ages that I didn't spent my entire fucking life locked in an ideological struggle against authoritarianism just to sit idly by while an even worse version took over here at home.

So I guess my opinion differs from the incessant negativity from the left.

Proving that you are either ineducable or insane.
Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State

Both.

(fixed a little oopsie for you, babe.)

The US is a declining power for some time and rightwing policies has a lot to do with it.
Every Democrat had to feel pressure from the right and the MIC. The nations wealth was wasted on more than enough military hardware, we produced enough nuclear weapons to destroy the planet several times over and still they want more. How insane.

These people will never compromise, never admit being wrong and never surrender. They need to be replaced as soon as possible before they turn the practice of good government into a joke.
Posted by: pj in jesusland on March 26, 2007 at 4:15 AM

Yes, but there is a whole other set right behind these ones, talking and believing the same garbage these ones do.
Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Mouthpieces have puked their version of twisted Republican mantra all over the airwaves of America, enflaming scads of up and coming GOP generations. Who counters these brainwash terrorists so that our young people can see both sides of the political coin?

The deluge of brain-death twitterings here by left-wing trash talkers reveals their witless illiteracy.

what does this say about that half of the country that voted this bozo and his circle-jerk of morons a second term long after the incompetence writing was on the wall?

They get a free pass. The real villians are those couple of people who voted for Nader. They went against the DLC, so the Naderites are the most dangersous threat to the American Way and must be ostracized with all of the political hate Democratic moderates can muster.

"The root of all evil truly is money, especially in politics. We can't any longer exist as a democracy unless we come to grips with that problem and we unite as a people and stop it." Ronnie Earle

"...In half a century, I have not seen a president so isolated from his own party in Congress..."

Ah! So that is why they have all been voting against him!

..oh..wait...

The deluge of brain-death twitterings here by left-wing trash talkers reveals their witless illiteracy.
Posted by: daveinboca

Boca Raton means 'Mouth of the Rat' in Spanish. Nuff said.

I think that JimBob way upthread really nails the issue.

Just to add my own two cents to his comments, there's no reason in the world to believe that Bush did anything more than to select the best and the brightest among Conservative "policy wonks" (a term I can only employ here with scare quotes) when he populated his administration. We heard no complaints whatever from the Conservative movement when Bush took office that they had been in any way overlooked when it came to filling the ranks of the Bush administration. All the evidence is that there was a steady, frictionless movement back and forth between the Conservative "think tanks" and other "intellectual" institutions on the one side, and the Bush adminstration on the other.

The point is, this really was their best possible shot at turning their ideology into a set of governing institutions. No stone seemed to be unturned in the effort to bring about a strictly Conservative government. They spent 40 years putting together a movement, defining and refining their ideology and principles of governance, and this sad story is all they have to tell.

And if you need still further evidence that this was their best possible effort, consider how little real criticism the Conservative movement has been able to muster up toward the Bush administration, even in its current state of extreme unpopularity and disgrace. What little they have been able to say has been unfocused and inconsistent, one Conservative saying the Bush adminstration went to far in one direction, another asserting that it went to far in the other.

As I've said, the Bush administration is really the reductio ad absurdum of the Conservative movement.

Our job is to make sure that the American people neve forget it.

neve = never

duh.

The deluge of brain-death twitterings here by left-wing trash talkers reveals their witless illiteracy.

Do elaborate, Dave. Explain this statement. Make this *illiterate liberal* understand how this is all much ado about nothing. I await your sage imparting of wisdom.

Just make sure to use fresh ideas because the stale, debunked ones have been deleted lately.

Conservative "policy wonks" = lobbyists

hey norm...

in between the 2-wtc bombings....(8.5-years)

the #1 killer of americans by terror was...

timothy mcveigh...

by 3-to-1 margin...

mcveigh is dead...

osama?

well....after 2-invasions....3200-dead american soldiers....tens of thousands of innocent iraqi's dead....and 419-billion spent...and counting...

U.S. spy chief says Bin Laden in Pakistan - United Press International 2/28/2007

gwb...that's one heck of a job....

It's been obvious since long before he was elected that George Bush was a lightweight. Then came Paul O'Neill's book that confirmed it. After all O'Neill was a renowned professional manager. Then despite mountains of evidence he was re-elected, how anyone who watched that first debate could vote for this buffoon is beyond me, but they did, which just demonstrates that emotion is more powerful than rationality. Finally, the light bulb seems to have come on and it's obvious he has lost the country. The only good news to come out of all this is that he seems to have taken the Republican party with him if you look at the latest poll from Pew.

mcveigh is dead...

That's right--put to death by...

drumroll, please...

June 11, 2001 during the Bush Administration.

Clinton--things happen, nothing gets done about it.

Bush--things happen, entire countries are destroyed, governments toppled, democracy is brought to people and the purveyors of death and destruction are either hanged or die by lethal injection.

Clinton--smarminess and triangulation
Bush--results and prosperity

When are you liberals going to learn? The world has always hated us. There has never been a time in our history when the world, as a community, ever sat back and admired us or approved of us. You say that the standing of the US in the world is low right now? When has it ever been high? American foreign policy is predicated on the notion that the world is always going to disapprove of us, so grow up. We make moves, we make a few mistakes and break a few eggs here and there, but one thing you cannot escape--

--we haven't been attacked since 9/11, now have we?

You're very, very welcome.

davefromboca:Jimmy Carter remains the single most incompetent president the Republic has suffered since James Buchanan.

try using this criteria...

dead americans from terror and record debt....

those two allow gwb to stand alone...

heck of a job...