Reflecting on tragedy

I can't believe that one of the writers I find myself quoting most often is Nixon's former White House counsel, John Dean.  But Dean understands this Bush team, and understands how destructive they are.  So here I go again, with Dean's comment on the recent tragedy: Understanding the 2004 Presidential Election: Beyond the Polarized Electorate, And The Republicans' Superior Voter Turnout Findlaw.com 11/05/04.

In his victory speech, after thanking supporters, Bush said, "I want to speak to every person who voted for my opponent. To make this nation stronger and better I will need your support, and I will work to earn it. I will do all I can do to deserve your trust." Yet the next day, in his first post-election press conference, he described working with his opponents as their agreeing with his goals and aims.

With four years of evidence, Kerry supporters - realists that they are, who have learned to watch what Bush and Cheney do, rather than what they say - will hardly be persuaded that this administration seeks a new era of bipartisanship. That is particularly true given that the President suggested at his recent press conference that the divisiveness will end when everyone agrees with his positions. Little wonder there is widespread depression.

The sensible take on the next four years will not be found in the President's faux offers of thorny olive branches with very short stems. Bush and Cheney are not going to trim their sails, and with the ship of state listing dangerously starboard, no one should expect smooth sailing for the next four years. Humility does not come easily to these men of hubris. Rancor should be expected. Indeed, it may be necessary to keep them from sinking us all.

Dean relies heavily in this article on the much-quoted study sponsored by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA), The Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters 10/21/04 (*.pdf file).  See also PIPA's summary.  As Dean notes, "this study wasn't funded by partisan political groups. To the contrary, it was underwritten by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Ford Foundation."

Dean is particularly curious about the precise role that Christian Right ministers played not only in the election result, but in the curious counter-factual beliefs held by so many Bush supporters on questions like WMDs in Iraq which the PIPA study documented.  He reports:

What I had heard intrigued me. Were conservative religious leaders pushing junk information on their parishioners? I began listening to a wide cross-section of radio stations, to see what was being said.

Several Christian radio shows included frequent, unabashed proselytizing for Bush votes. Ministers, and their guests, regularly said that a vote for George Bush was the vote that God wanted cast. One minister advised listeners that "God's watchman" would be observing us all "in the polling booths," and reporting what we did directly to God.

Of course, this is anecdotal evidence. It was (and is) too soon for any reliable studies to have surfaced. But the religious influence in this election certainly accounts for at least part of the reason why Kerry supporters cannot understand Bush supporters. Conservative religiously [sic] leaders have been boasting of the massive turnout they instituted for the election.

The Los Angeles Times has been following the Bush team's rush to use the election results to show the Republican Values voters just what kind of nasty stuff comes with the no-gay-marriage package.

Privatized Accounts Moved to 'Fast Track' by Warren Vieth and Janet Hook Los Angeles Times 11/05/04.

President Bush on Thursday set the stage for a monumental legislative battle by placing Social Security reform at the top of his second-term agenda, even though he acknowledged that no long-term fix would be pain-free.

The not-pain-free part?  That means you, Republican Values voters.  But thank God and his Prophet Bush that you're saved from gay marriage!

Members of Congress and independent policy analysts said the president's remarks signaled a willingness to spend his newly won political clout on an issue so sensitive that leaders had long been reluctant to grapple with it.

"He is getting ready for bold action on Social Security. He's getting people prepared," said Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), an advocate of private retirement accounts.

"It's going to be an enormously bloody fight," predicted Michael Tanner, director of the Project on Social Security Choice at the libertarian Cato Institute. "But the political climate really has changed, and it is possible to do this now.... It's on the fast track."

The hardcore rightwing Republicans have never reconciled themselves to the existence of the Social Security program, ever since it was created during the New Deal in the 1930s.  Now they're going after it.  Any Republican Values voters who think this is going to be an improvement of the system should understand that it means swallowing the Republican Value that being old means being poor.  Unless your part of that small group to whom Bush's tax cuts are targeted, of course.

Emboldened Bush Sets Ambitious Conservative Goals for 2nd Term by Doyle McManus Los Angeles Times 11/05/04.

On Thursday, as he outlined his plans for a second term, Bush presented himself as a sadder but tougher president — determined to get what he wants, even if that means bruising fights ahead.

"I've been wisened to the ways of Washington," he said at his post-election news conference. He made a small bow toward bipartisanship, but made it clear that his overriding aim was to achieve his conservative goals. ...

Just as he did as governor of Texas and as a first-time presidential candidate, Bush has reduced his agenda to four or five major goals. "You've heard the agenda," he said, "Social Security and tax reform, moving this economy forward, education, fighting and winning the war on terror."

McManus seems a little too willing to buy Republican spin about Bush styling himself afterReagan, but I'll save that subject for another time.

Bush Eager to Spend New 'Political Capital' on Goals by Edwin Chen Los Angeles Times 11/05/04.

Declaring that this year's election had armed him with fresh "political capital," President Bush said Thursday he would use that asset to try to fundamentally change Social Security and alter the federal tax code — twin goals certain to provoke strong opposition.

Exuding confidence at his first news conference after his victory in a contentious election, Bush said he hoped to work with Democrats in pursuing his agenda. But he left little doubt that if need be, he would press ahead without them.

"I earned capital in the campaign — political capital — and now I intend to spend it," he said. "It is my style. That's what happened after the 2000 election: I earned some capital. I've earned capital in this election, and I'm going to spend it for what I told the people I'd spend it on."

This means: for the wealthiest, more tax subsidies; for Republican Values voters, you get to be poor when you're old.  Or, hey, maybe Dick Cheney will write you into his will and give you a cut of the Halliburton profits in Iraq.  But Bush and Cheney will save you from the scourge of gay marriage! 

The prospect of at least one vacancy on the Supreme Court in the near future has arisen with the news that Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has thyroid cancer. Emphasizing that he would deal with vacancies on the court if and when they occurred, Bush reiterated that his nominees would know "the difference between personal opinion and the strict interpretation of the law."

Oh, yeah, kiss Roe v. Wade goodbye.

And all that "bipartisanship" nonsense?

"The campaign over, Americans are expecting a bipartisan effort and results," he said. "I will reach out to everyone who shares our goals." [my emphasis]

And after having sharply assailed Kerry's foreign policy views during the campaign, Bush said, "Democrats want a free and peaceful world."

But administration officials made it clear that there would be limits to the president's efforts toward bipartisanship.

"His arm is only so long. It's important for others to reach back as well," said White House press secretary Scott McClellan.

Chen seems to think Bush's comment about Democrats wanting a "free and peaceful world" was a gesture of reconciliation.  I think it was more of a statement that the Dems are not among that group of "everyone who shares our goals."

Well, Republican Values voters, if you or your son or daughter is about to get drafted, they can always get out of it by announcing they're gay.  No, wait...