Bushite Power Grab Seems To Be Ending Badly

It hasn't ended yet, and I won't be sure it has ended until they leave Washington or are, preferably, locked up.

White House power grab ends badly
Published on: 06/28/07

In the heady days after the 2004 elections, White House political guru Karl Rove proclaimed a "rolling realignment" that would make the Republican Party the dominant political force for decades to come. The historical model, he said, was the election of 1896, which had ushered in three decades of almost unbroken GOP power.

"We only knew that it was an election that realigned American politics years afterward," Rove said of the 1896 election. "And I think the same thing will be here."

Today, less than three years later, that dream has shattered. President Bush is one of the most unpopular presidents in history, criticized harshly even by candidates in his own party trying to succeed him. Opinion polls show a marked trend in favor of Democrats. And although Republicans could conceivably keep control of the White House, Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate will almost surely be strengthened in 2008.

The rise and subsequent collapse of the Bush presidency is a story about power. A single-minded pursuit of power, without regard to tradition, law or the Constitution, briefly made the Bush administration the most feared political organization in at least a generation. But in time that same bare-knuckled pursuit of power brought the administration to its knees, evidence that the system designed by the Founding Fathers to frustrate centralized power still functions, creaky as it may be.

It is true that every administration, Republican or Democratic, tries to maximize its political power. Every administration has to fight to impose its agenda on a balky federal bureaucracy. Every administration tries to use the levers of government to gain political advantage.

But from the beginning, the Bush administration has been different, both in scope and ambition. It entered office in 2001 not as a political party taking its turn at the reins of government, but as a political movement, a revolution, even, that intended to transform the government and the country. With the attacks of Sept. 11, it was given the opportunity to make that revolution real.

The ultimate failure of the Bush administration to take advantage of that opportunity can be attributed to two basic flaws, both related to its pursuit and use of power.

First, it brooked no dissent, internal or external. Dissent is invaluable; properly respected, it can act as a powerful internal compass for decision-makers trying to steer a responsible course. Even in a rigid institution such as the military, good officers encourage subordinates to voice dissent, with the expectation that such dissent ceases once an order is given.

But on issue after issue, the Bush administration denied itself that advantage. A revolutionary movement tolerates no dissent because it already knows all the answers. There was one way, the party way and any who dared question or challenge that way — no matter how wise their counsel — were silenced. On issues such as Iraq, the repercussions of that approach will haunt this country for a generation.

Second, the administration valued unquestioned loyalty to its cause far more than it valued competence, which is another hallmark of a revolutionary movement. That misplaced emphasis explains how a small-time political hanger-on named Michael Brown ended up in charge of the Federal Emergency Management Agency when Hurricane Katrina hit.

It explains how job applicants to serve in the Coalition Provisional Authority that ruled post-invasion Iraq were hired based on their sentiments about Roe v. Wade, not on their knowledge of Arab culture or experience in nation-building.

It explains how highly regarded career lawyers in the Justice Department were pushed aside by Bush officials to make room for "real Americans" with far less ability but unquestioned loyalty, a phenomenon that was undoubtedly repeated in many other federal agencies as well.

The result has been a government obsessed with winning elections but not with establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility or any of the other roles laid out for it in the Constitution. And that government is reaping its just rewards.

• Jay Bookman is the deputy editorial page editor. His column appears Thursdays and Mondays.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.