Where has the political shrewdness of Bush's administration gone?

I selected these two stories in today's news because I think they help make a point I've been trying to make for some time.

First read:

Reuters says U.S. troops obstruct reporting of Iraq

LONDON, Sept 28 (Reuters) - The conduct of U.S. troops in Iraq, including increasing detention and accidental shootings of journalists, is preventing full coverage of the war reaching the American public, Reuters said on Wednesday.

In a letter to Virginia Republican Sen. John Warner, head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Reuters said U.S. forces were limiting the ability of independent journalists to operate. The letter from Reuters Global Managing Editor David Schlesinger called on Warner to raise widespread media concerns about the conduct of U.S. troops with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who is due to testify to the committee on Thursday.

Schlesinger referred to "a long parade of disturbing incidents whereby professional journalists have been killed, wrongfully detained, and/or illegally abused by U.S. forces in Iraq."

More...

And...

Democrat accuses Park police chief of mistreating peace protesters

Ranking House Judiciary Democrat Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) alleged Tuesday evening that protesters who were arrested outside the White House Monday were held in handcuffs for as long as twelve hours in cramped buses before they were released, RAW STORY has learned.

In a missive to United States Park Police Dwight Pettiford Tuesday evening, Conyers raised concern that protesters were mistreated by police.

"Some of those were released at 4:30 in the morning after being arrested at 4:00 the previous afternoon," he wrote. "Those released after midnight were unfamiliar with Washington, D.C., and had no means to travel back to their hotels once the metro had closed. Anacostia is not frequented by taxicabs after midnight."

"Many of those held captive the longest were grandmothers and senior citizens," he added.

Neither of these stories make political sense for the Bush administration.

Regardless of how you feel about this administration, few could argue it was politically inept. Yet, lately, I see stories like this, making me believe that something has definitely changed.

Where has all the political shrewdness gone?

Add this administration's odd and somewhat unbelievable handling of the Hurricane relief efforts, and what I begin to see are acts and decisions made out of desperation or distraction.

These examples are but a few that serves as an indication that the peak has long come and gone for this administration. It is only a matter of time now for the political pendulum to take full swing in another direction.

Mark my words... The political grip has been lost.


[edit on 28-9-2005 by loam]

I mark those words and second them!

My theory is that it's a combination of factors. Including:
-A political struggle for the power of 'Top Dog' status in the White House (probably between Bush and Cheney/Rumsfeld)
-The cliff that the Iraq war 'situation' seems to be tumbling over
-The war protests around the country and the world
-Corruption in the administration is being exposed
-The windy sisters Katrina and Rita and the lousy federal response
-alcohol

And the cherry on top is that the President is a raving Time Bomb.

Depressed and demoralized White House staffers say working at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is “life in a hellhole” as they try to deal with a sullen, moody President whose temper tantrums drive staffers crying from the room and bring the business of running the country to a halt.

“It’s like working in an insane asylum,” says one White House aide. “People walk around like they’re in a trance. We’re the dance band on the Titanic, playing out our last songs to people who know the ship is sinking and none of us are going to make it.”
...
‘It reminds me of the Nixon days,’ says a longtime GOP political consultant with contacts in the White House. ‘Everybody is an enemy; everybody is out to get him. That’s the mood over there.’”

To stuff is hitting the fan. I don't know what we have coming in our future, but unfortunately, it looks like it's going to be 'interesting' ... and I don't mean that in a good way.

I agree ..you make good points.

you posted:

Neither of these stories make political sense for the Bush administration.

Regardless of how you feel about this administration, few could argue it was politically inept. Yet, lately, I see stories like this, making me believe that something has definitely changed.

Where has all the political shrewdness gone?

Add this administration's odd and somewhat unbelievable handling of the Hurricane relief efforts, and what I begin to see are acts and decisions made out of desperation or distraction.

These examples are but a few that serves as an indication that the peak has long come and gone for this administration. It is only a matter of time now for the political pendulum to take full swing in another direction.

Mark my words... The political grip has been lost.


Excellent point. I think this administration would be better off ..running the Whitehouse and nation by poll results instead of the method they do now. Isnt this the method prefered by previous administrations and even going back to Ancient Rome????
By the way...Loam..I wonder which is more important to you ...I'd like your opinion on this one. Which is more important ...what makes political sense or the buisness of the nation.?? What do you think?? How do you know if the two positions are one and the same or where and when they seperate into two different entitys.?? What do you think? You see loam..I am constantly insulted by such a statement from both the right and left. Do "experts" ever ask this question??? You know Bill Maher, O'riley. Hannity ..et al??? How about congress , presidents et al...do they ask when whoring out the public.??? No matter who is in office.
Political sense or the buisness of the nation...which one is in play here in America. I am curious as to your take on this!!!

Thanks,
Orangetom

Benevolent Heretic:

That article is terrific!

“A president who normally thrives on tough talk and self-assurance finds himself at what aides privately describe as a low point in office, one that is changing the psychic and political aura of the White House, as well as its distinctive political approach,”

This confirms what I have sensed for some time now. Remember those pictures of him I posted last week? You could see it in his face....as easy to read as the written word.

Late last week, Bush was, by some accounts, down and angry. But another Bush aide described the atmosphere inside the White House as "strangely surreal and almost detached."

...

‘It reminds me of the Nixon days,’

Exactly!

It's hard to imagine three more years of this... I may be wrong, but I can't recall and administration imploding like this in the first year of its second term... I agree with you BH, I sense we are in for some ugly times ahead.


Orangetom

To reply adequately to your questions involves to some degree a game of semantics...

Which is more important ...what makes political sense or the business of the nation.?? What do you think??

Very often they are one in the same. In my view, the key to successful leadership is the ability to employ both, without abusing either.

How do you know if the two positions are one and the same or where and when they separate into two different entities.??

During times of national crisis, the answer would be obvious to me.

Political sense or the business of the nation...which one is in play here in America. I am curious as to your take on this!!!

Neither. (And here is where the semantics come into play...) There is nothing that makes "sense" about what is going on in the White House today.

Hope that answers your questions...

[edit on 28-9-2005 by loam]

I also agree, something has definitely changed in the White House, somebody either woke up or fell asleep, I'm not sure which yet.

Originally posted by worldwatcher
somebody either woke up or fell asleep, I'm not sure which yet.

I never thought of it that way! Too funny...and ominous.

More evidence that something material has changed in the White House...

White House declines to totally rule out torture

WASHINGTON (AFP) - In an important clarification of President George W. Bush's earlier statement, a top White House official refused to unequivocally rule out the use of torture, arguing the US administration was duty-bound to protect Americans from terrorist attack.

The comment, by US national security adviser Stephen Hadley, came amid heated national debate about whether the CIA and other US intelligence agencies should be authorized to use what is being referred to as "enhanced interrogation techniques" to extract from terror suspects information that may help prevent future assaults.

The US Senate voted 90-9 early last month to attach an amendment authored by Republican Senator John McCain to a defense spending bill that would prohibit "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of detainees in US custody. But the White House has threatened to veto the measure and has lobbied senators to have the language removed or modified to allow an exemption for the Central Intelligence Agency.

During a trip to Panama earlier this month, Bush said that Americans "do not torture."

However, appearing on CNN's "Late Edition" program, Hadley elaborated on the policy, making clear the White House could envisage circumstances, in which the broad pledge not to torture might not apply...

More...

Here is my question. What is the point of Hadley's clarification?

Whether true or not, the President of the United States just said a few days ago that Americans "do not torture." Hadley's clarification dangerously nears a contradiction of the President's statement. What benefit does that clarification serve?

I remain convinced that the "well-oiled machine" is throwing coils and springs in every direction.

Am I wrong?

loam and BH

IMO what once seemed to be a climate of confidence has diminished to a scene of, "they're out there just a steppin' and a fetchin' like their feets were on fire and their asses was catchin'" [old song lyrics]

They seem to have entered the "game" with what they considered to be a well prepared and constructed gameplan per se. Now, having exhausted their "playbook" it would seem they have simply tossed it aside and resorted to more of a "night at the improv" approach.

My concerns lie with the eventuality of a 4th and long scenario when it's time for the ole' hail mary play. What might that be and at whose expense?

Peace2All

Condi, go short out to the flat. Donnie go long, Dick, well, you just go to an undisclosed location. I'm gonna lob it up there and we can just hope for the best?!

[edit on 11/14/2005 by 12m8keall2c]

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
Condi, go short out to the flat. Donnie go long, Dick, well, you just go to an undisclosed location. I'm gonna lob it up there and we can just hope for the best?!

Perhaps that describes it best!

Thanks for making me laugh.

Still waiting on loams answer..to this post.


I posted:

"Excellent point. I think this administration would be better off ..running the Whitehouse and nation by poll results instead of the method they do now. Isnt this the method prefered by previous administrations and even going back to Ancient Rome????
By the way...Loam..I wonder which is more important to you ...I'd like your opinion on this one. Which is more important ...what makes political sense or the buisness of the nation.?? What do you think?? How do you know if the two positions are one and the same or where and when they seperate into two different entitys.?? What do you think? You see loam..I am constantly insulted by such a statement from both the right and left. Do "experts" ever ask this question??? You know Bill Maher, O'riley. Hannity ..et al??? How about congress , presidents et al...do they ask when whoring out the public.??? No matter who is in office.
Political sense or the buisness of the nation...which one is in play here in America. I am curious as to your take on this!!!

Thanks,
Orangetom

My answer is that in order to accomplish the true business of the nation, you need political sense. In other words, the former requires the latter.

Unfortunately, I have not seen that principle applied in a very long time.

Thanks for your reply.

I tend to agree..I havent seen much political shrewdness applied in awhile. Especially where concernt the buisness of the American Public. The political partys yes.
The most common index of political shrewdness used in this country is emotions. Emotional Jag..." he played on our fears!!!!!!!!!!!" This sort of technique. We are bombarded by it constantly. Mostly from the left but sometimes when necessary so too from the right. It gets very tiring as a mantra.
The ultimate insult to me however ..is policy by polls..this one is a real index of intelligence at work. One has to be educated in shrewdness to pass this along to the public as politics. No matter who is doing it.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Originally posted by loamRegardless of how you feel about this administration, few could argue it was politically inept. Yet, lately, I see stories like this, making me believe that something has definitely changed.

Where has all the political shrewdness gone?

They were never shrewd, they just had control of the reporting systems and a majority, making this analogy:
when I play slap fight with my 10 yr old nephew and land taps at will...does that mean I'm a great fighter?

- you initially own the media via a quid pro quo in 1999 up to beginning of 2001
- you are losing them big time and TA DA!, 9/11 comes around. It's unpatriotic to do anything but support the president
- it's used as a battering ram to force GOP majorities in Congress

All things are still humming, then the obvious faults come thru the paint.....Iraq without a plan/Iraq without real evidence/torture sanctioned from on high/Horse trainers heading departments in charge of sving American lives.........a reawakened ( partially) press and you have what you have today.
Nothing to do with a previous shrewdness, but more so a general realization that everything they've ever done has been for politics sake, not in our best interests.