Monday
Oct172005
Bush: A truly small man
Monday, October 17, 2005 at 3:00AM
By Ellen Ratner
This month's story has been that George W. Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supremes has pitted him against his own conservative base. Yet for liberals, this episode also reveals some major insights about this president.
Bush's four years in office has sometimes looked like a painting that claims to be art, although one in which viewers could make little sense of the zig-zags, splatters and lines on its canvas. But with the appointment of Miers, the whole thing is suddenly explicable – it is the portrait of a small man pretending to be a great one, a little thinker claiming big ideas, a James Buchanan dressed as Abe Lincoln, a hack believing he was a statesman.
Before 9-11 geometrically expanded his shoe size, Bush was widely seen as a little man. In 2000, he had the good fortune of running against Al Gore, who, while I liked his policies and principles, was in many ways also a little man. Bush's first year in office was chiefly distinguished by a payoff to his loyalists (i.e., the tax cut), Karl Rove-inspired lip service to his evangelical base and the mishandling of an incident where a U.S. military plane may (or may not) have strayed into Chinese airspace. The little man with little principles failed to fill his first nine months in office with much to keep the public thinking; most people had former Rep. Gary Condit's troubles on their minds.
September 11 "made" Bush, although the United States military – a part of our government that is really the creation of the Republicans, Democrats and most of all, the American people – picked up the tab. The little man was suddenly elevated on the ruins of the World Trade Center. But his string of failures, temporarily buried under our military's successes, seems all too obvious in retrospect. Add them up and ask yourself, "What do they mean?"
The CIA failed to warn of 9-11 and badly advised the president on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Did heads roll? No. CIA chief George Tenet was retained and given a presidential medal. Bush's sainted loyalty, it was whispered.
Rumsfeld incompetently managed the Iraq invasion. Unsealed borders, rampant public disorder, Saddam's army slipped away, victory was declared, and then everybody was surprised as Baathists mysteriously resurfaced in an insurgency. Did heads roll? Nope. Bush's loyalty, aides whispered.
After 9-11, next to the military, the most important part of the federal government is FEMA. Life is what happens while you're planning something else – while everyone thought the next disaster would come from terrorists, Hurricane Katrina showed up. And what did we learn? That FEMA was staffed by Bush Hack-o-Rama loyalist Michael Brown, a man unfit for the position by virtue of no experience. Bush made a barely audible Rove-crafted mea culpa, Brown fell on his sword, and the people of the Gulf picked up the tab. You see, Bush is a loyal guy.
Now, we come to Harriet Miers. There are plenty of right-wing women judges who'll forget more about the Constitution than Miers will ever know. But Bush, little fella' that he his, threw over his conservative base, the same folks who have followed him blindly down many a dead end, in return for – what? Loyalty – to Harriet Hack Miers.
So here's the lesson: A truly big person has a real sense of the national interest. You may not always agree with it, but the big person will execute it at all costs. Think Abe Lincoln preserving the Union, FDR ending the Great Depression, or Harry Truman's dropping the bomb, Woodrow Wilson's gambling on the League of Nations, LBJ's devotion to the War on Poverty, Ronald Reagan's defeating the Soviets, or JFK's desire for a test ban treaty. I'd be the first to argue about some of these men and their policies, but never about their sincerity.
But Bush is different. In his world, small loyalties trump the national interest. The nomination of Harriet Hack Miers ties everything together. Miers' nomination isn't an aberration – it's business as usual. And what a damn bloody business it's been. Americans die in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, New Orleans and Biloxi, and Fallujah and Ramadi (so the Iraqis can have a "constitution" with a Bill of Rights photocopied from the Quran), so that Bush can have a legacy of . . . Paul Bremer?
Give me Tammany Hall or the old Daley Machine out of Chicago. Those times might have been just as small-minded – but they were fun to watch and nobody died.
This month's story has been that George W. Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supremes has pitted him against his own conservative base. Yet for liberals, this episode also reveals some major insights about this president.
Bush's four years in office has sometimes looked like a painting that claims to be art, although one in which viewers could make little sense of the zig-zags, splatters and lines on its canvas. But with the appointment of Miers, the whole thing is suddenly explicable – it is the portrait of a small man pretending to be a great one, a little thinker claiming big ideas, a James Buchanan dressed as Abe Lincoln, a hack believing he was a statesman.
Before 9-11 geometrically expanded his shoe size, Bush was widely seen as a little man. In 2000, he had the good fortune of running against Al Gore, who, while I liked his policies and principles, was in many ways also a little man. Bush's first year in office was chiefly distinguished by a payoff to his loyalists (i.e., the tax cut), Karl Rove-inspired lip service to his evangelical base and the mishandling of an incident where a U.S. military plane may (or may not) have strayed into Chinese airspace. The little man with little principles failed to fill his first nine months in office with much to keep the public thinking; most people had former Rep. Gary Condit's troubles on their minds.
September 11 "made" Bush, although the United States military – a part of our government that is really the creation of the Republicans, Democrats and most of all, the American people – picked up the tab. The little man was suddenly elevated on the ruins of the World Trade Center. But his string of failures, temporarily buried under our military's successes, seems all too obvious in retrospect. Add them up and ask yourself, "What do they mean?"
The CIA failed to warn of 9-11 and badly advised the president on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Did heads roll? No. CIA chief George Tenet was retained and given a presidential medal. Bush's sainted loyalty, it was whispered.
Rumsfeld incompetently managed the Iraq invasion. Unsealed borders, rampant public disorder, Saddam's army slipped away, victory was declared, and then everybody was surprised as Baathists mysteriously resurfaced in an insurgency. Did heads roll? Nope. Bush's loyalty, aides whispered.
After 9-11, next to the military, the most important part of the federal government is FEMA. Life is what happens while you're planning something else – while everyone thought the next disaster would come from terrorists, Hurricane Katrina showed up. And what did we learn? That FEMA was staffed by Bush Hack-o-Rama loyalist Michael Brown, a man unfit for the position by virtue of no experience. Bush made a barely audible Rove-crafted mea culpa, Brown fell on his sword, and the people of the Gulf picked up the tab. You see, Bush is a loyal guy.
Now, we come to Harriet Miers. There are plenty of right-wing women judges who'll forget more about the Constitution than Miers will ever know. But Bush, little fella' that he his, threw over his conservative base, the same folks who have followed him blindly down many a dead end, in return for – what? Loyalty – to Harriet Hack Miers.
So here's the lesson: A truly big person has a real sense of the national interest. You may not always agree with it, but the big person will execute it at all costs. Think Abe Lincoln preserving the Union, FDR ending the Great Depression, or Harry Truman's dropping the bomb, Woodrow Wilson's gambling on the League of Nations, LBJ's devotion to the War on Poverty, Ronald Reagan's defeating the Soviets, or JFK's desire for a test ban treaty. I'd be the first to argue about some of these men and their policies, but never about their sincerity.
But Bush is different. In his world, small loyalties trump the national interest. The nomination of Harriet Hack Miers ties everything together. Miers' nomination isn't an aberration – it's business as usual. And what a damn bloody business it's been. Americans die in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, New Orleans and Biloxi, and Fallujah and Ramadi (so the Iraqis can have a "constitution" with a Bill of Rights photocopied from the Quran), so that Bush can have a legacy of . . . Paul Bremer?
Give me Tammany Hall or the old Daley Machine out of Chicago. Those times might have been just as small-minded – but they were fun to watch and nobody died.
Reader Comments