The Smarminess Of Bush's Politics

[Oilwellian]

The recent flack over Rockefeller's memo and the GOP crying "partisan politics" has an all too familiar sound to it. Let's take a walk down memory lane and read the many examples of Bush's partisan politics in the past two years. Although I can only post 4 paragraphs of the article, I highly recommend you read it in its entirety because it's chocked full of examples.

<snip>
And in perhaps the most brazen example of political merchandising, White House chief of staff Andrew Card explained why the debate on the war was being pushed past last summer's doldrums: "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August."

I've been over most of this before. But in light of Bush's "purely politics," the smarminess stands out anew in 10-foot tall neon letters: GALLING. But standing equally tall is the Republicans' operational theory: IF IT WORKED ONCE, WHY NOT AGAIN?

Let's test the equation, remembering Card's marketing admonition about sultry, unmotivating August. So where did Bush start to really press the theme? In a series of campaign events for Republican candidates in September and October 2002. The nadir was reached in New Jersey when Bush declared that the Senate, then controlled by Democrats, is "not interested in the security of the American people." The White House said that Bush was speaking strictly about Democratic questions regarding establishment of the Homeland Security Department, but that's not what the headlines said nor was it what the White House wanted the headlines to say.

Just to prove that they were leaving nothing to nuance, Vice President Dick Cheney said the election of a Republican challenger in a U.S. House seat in Kansas would aid "in terms of winning the war on terror ... and defending our homeland."

In case you've forgotten, Republicans were the big winners last fall, and Bush's humping the hustings was given a lot of the credit. But now he can accuse the Democrats of "pure politics" without the microphone in front of him spontaneously combusting.

<much more>
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/2044746