Bush and the Democrats: Who is Truly Relevant?

At yesterday's press conference, President Bush insisted that he is still "relevant." Normally, it's an immutable law of politics that if you have to say you're relevant, you're not (shades of Clinton circa 1995). But in Bush's case, his role as the primary Decider on the war in Iraq is keeping him tragically relevant -- in the same way that the driver of a bus careening toward the edge of cliff is extremely relevant to his passengers.

Okay, so Bush is relevant. And deluded. Deeply deluded, if he truly believes, as he also claimed, that he and Congressional Democrats are "finding common ground on Iraq."
Beating your opponent into the ground with vetoes and filibuster threats is not the same as finding common ground.

Barbara Boxer caught some flack for going on Hardball last night and saying, "The president just doesn't seem to be in command of the facts or what he's trying to say... I don't find it particularly stable."

But Boxer is right. And Democrats need more of their leaders calling the president out on his delusions. Unfortunately, they have convinced themselves that if they just keep their heads down they will back into a landslide win in 2008. It's why they refuse to use the most potent weapon the Constitution has given them: the power to stop funding the war. They have that power, but not the will or the courage to use it. Instead they are adopting the same timid approach that cost them in 2002 and 2004 -- and, in doing so, are playing right into the Republicans' hands.

It's no surprise that Congress has an even lower approval rating than Bush, who himself has dropped to all-time-low Nixonian levels. The American people don't like that Bush is continuing to do what he's always done (whatever he damn well pleases); but they hate the fact that Democrats have an opportunity to aggressively push for an end to the war but refuse to take full advantage.

In many ways, it's déjà vu all over again. Bush is dialing up the fear factor and Democrats are running for cover -- signing off on a gutted FISA bill, dithering over attempts to defund the war, and having 2002 flashbacks as Bush and Cheney seed the clouds for another war, with Bush warning of "World War III" if Iran is able to build a nuclear weapon. And when it comes to tweaking our lizard brains, WW III is definitely a bump up from Axis of Evil.

So Bush is still relevant. And unless the Democrats make it crystal clear -- in actions as well as words -- that there is no common ground, they risk finding themselves increasingly irrelevant.

Comments

[JerseyBob]

Just picked up Thomas Paine's The Rights of Man. It was first published in England in 1791. In an introduction to an edition published in England in 1915, George Jacob Holyoake writes: (Louis XVI was attempting to flee Versailles)

"In May, Paine visited France; and was in Paris at the time of the king's flight. On that occasion, he is said to have remarked to a friend: "You see the absurdity of monarchical governments. Here will be a whole nation disturbed by the folly of one man."

I think of this in the context of what is going on today. Bush's folly some call it. It is said that the past is prologue, that history informs the future. A democracy too can be disturbed by the folly of one man. Perhaps someone who calls himself a decider.

Years ago I started (and didn't finish) a book on the French Revolution. King Louis XVI was described as riding off to meet his assembly because it was meeting without him. How could they hold this particular meeting without the king? The author suggested that if the king needs to ride to the assembly to let them know that he is the king, he is no longer the king. I recall this, perhaps imperfectly, as I learn now that Bush has asserted, in a press conference held on October 18th, that he is relevant. Scarily, sadly relevant in some ways. Not relevant in others.

[GypsyO]

IF the American people would have voted out those who are bringing the Great America down 11/06- things would be a whole LOT different!!! So, you can't blame the existing Democratic Congress totally for not getting things through, over ridden or any veto's over ridden - they absolutely DO NOT have enough votes to make the changes everyone so desperately wanted accomplished because enough people didn't wake up in time!!!
Many are deliberately blocking anything the New Congress's tries to put through in order to make a statement that it is weak, Party first is the motto of these despicable elites, to H--- with anything good for the people/country they are supposed to be representing!! People better vote wisely OR we'll get more of the same thinking/actions of this administration.

[deminmo]

Just wanted to include something on this blog you might find interesting. An article in the
St. Louis paper tells several stories of soldiers with PTSS that have been labled by the
military as having had pre-existing mental
conditions and therefore not elegible for full
benefits. One man has been presented with a bill
for over $14,000 he is to pay back to the Veterans Administration! Talk about making someone irrelevant! What happened to honoring and taking care of those who serve?

[Nathaniel]

The real question should be is Arianna truly relevant anymore? She's getting more media exposure, she's on the pundit circuit, but when she asks for questions to ask Nancy Pelosi I sensed weakness. And sure enough she went soft on Pelosi. Arianna is enjoying the attention a little too much - you want access you be nice. I'm getting a bad feeling

[Horsefeather]

I believe some people feel that not funding the kids fighting the war is letting them down. There is some logic that if we have kids fighting and dying, it has to be for something. My brother died in Viet Nam in 1966 when most of the news from Viet Nam was about body counts and nothing on the corrupt regime that the U.S. was trying to support. The only thing keeping students out of the streets now is that they aren"t being drafted. Nobody seemed to object a whole lot when they sent the kids off to war in Iraq, but the idea of bringing them home without any consequence to the war just doesn"t fly in the red state mind. Never mind the fact that most of what Bush has done in office has been illegal, with one lie following another. Red state Republicans were outraged by Clinton"s affair with an aid and the possibility of legitimizing varied sexuality. These are really twisted priorities. Hundreds of thousands of irrelevant and faceless Iraqi's dead plus a few thousand of our kids as opposed to a dalliance different sexual orientation. Where is the outrage to stop this insanity? I think the American public is irrelevant. I feel like I am, unless my phone or computer is tapped.

[edpell]

Why was my post censored?

[edpell]

Politics is control by money only those groups with large funds of discretionary money are relevant. How much money does the pro-peace movement spend of politics per year? How much do the global corporations spend (distributed through their networks of retired executives)? How much money doe4s Israel spend? China? It is all about the money.The federal government is the defacto world government and world enforcer. All come to buy what they want. Unfortunately we have to provide the bodies of our children to die saving their profitability.

[mdeneen]

The Democratic Party died the day Bill Clinton took office. The sooner people see that big picture, the sooner they can put this party out of its misery and start over.

[racetoinfinity]

I didn't used to agree, but now I see how Clinton triangulated and the DLC tool over. He pushed NAFTA, WTO, and other "free trade agreements" very hard. He was a corporatist.

The only decent candidates we have now are Kucinich and Edwards, but still I've vote Dem. Paul Krugman was saying that all their health plans are improvements and get us closer to universal health care, even though Kucinich's is the only single payer plan.

[racetoinfinity]

I didn't used to believe that, but with his big push to pass NAFTA and WTO and other globalization (corporatist) DLC measures, I tend to agree with you now.

Go Kucinich and Edwards!

[SimonHelms]

Dear Arianna,
nothing to add, you're completely right.

I thought - some time ago - that Nancy Pelosi would be a tough lady.

Unfortunately, she only prolongues the apathy of the democratic part of the congress.

Goddam -'xcuse me - Al, you see that mess, so please....

[ldudley]

I too thought Ms. Pelosi would be much tougher, when the dems won the majority in congress I was so excited and now I am so disappointed, I wonder if the dictator is really that powerful or if the dems are just not that tough. I can't believe all the vetos that haven't been able to be overridden and how soft people are in congress, the only ones who have a voice in Washington it seems is the dicator and his puppets Chenney and Condi... How sad for this country, Al please take heed..

[twocrows]

Bush is relevant. Tragically so.

Congress could be relevant, should it so choose.

We are the only ones who are not relevant, no matter what we do. We keep trying and trying and working and working and NOTHING happens.

[bumpersticker]

One simple law would change America - "Only individuals can contribute to a candidate or a political campaign."

Walla! We're relevant again!

The current model is that enough money can buy enough TV to teach Skinner Pidgeons to pull the right lever.

[snaggster]

Voila.

[BadChristian]

When we have a President with the nuts to go against the Mega-corporations... Then we'll see who is relevant. Cheney may want you to believe that he has superpowered the Presidency, but without Wal-Mart's water bottles and Black water's security forces... The President is just a figure-head, to entertain the masses.

[tomsfork]

Perhaps Congress would like to try to make themselves relevant. I wonder why they don't try to stop the war by putting Bush in a lose-lose situation. Next time Bush asks for money for Iraq, say "Fine" and give him what he wants, except for one thing: Since Bush doesn't believe we must pay for this ("Deficits don't matter"), send a bill that pays for the war by raising the tax rate on the wealthiest Americans. Put Bush in what he would consider an impossible situation: Raise taxes on the rich (Egad! Communism!) or veto the war. Of course, this will never happen, Congress is as irrelevant as the president.

[BufoAmericanus]

Who is relevant?

Let's ask Conde Rice... I bet she's feeling relevant right now.

[therealredstateblues]

Condi "mushroom cloud" rice is the most ineffective S of S in recent history

She is an 8.9 out of 10 on the "Heckuva job Brownie" scale of incompetence

[Lemeritus]

Ms. Huffington, vis-a-vis the discussion on relevance (and comments concerning any number of other issues appearing and disappearing on the Huffington Post), my question is this:

Is anyone listening? Does anyone care what we say? Are we only engaging in egocentric speech therapy? We contribute, write letters to our representatives, vote, show up at rallies, and -- yes -- share our thoughts here. Yet nothing changes; we are not even acknowledged.

What will it take?

[doublebind]

I didn't read any other comments.

Dear Arianna,
"... use the most potent weapon the Constitution has given them: the power to stop funding the war..."
NOT.
Making every American (including those in Congress) watch Stephen Colbert's address to the Press Corp and DoubleEwe on a daily basis is the best solution allowed by the Constitution.
Then there's IMPEACHMENT for Pete's sake.
Yours,
A relentlessly pissed-off Kansan (Howbout those Kansans and that NOT COAL decision by the Secretary of the Dept. of Health and the Environment,eh!)