It appears that Capitol Hill Dems are finally getting their act together on Iraq. Tuesday, they forced a "sense of the Senate" resolution telling the President that next year should mark the beginning of the end of the occupation of Iraq. Encouraged by a series of GOP blunders and Bush's historically low poll numbers, the Democratic leadership seems poised to attack a central theme of this Administration -- that in time of war the President can do whatever he wants. The outrage is not only that George W lacks a plan for Iraq, but also that he believes he doesn't need to provide one. Bush's arrogant manner indicates his conviction that because he's commander-in-chief, he doesn't have to answer to Congress or the American people.
In his book Against All Enemies, former White House Counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke provides a chilling glimpse into Bush's mentality. On the night of 9/11, Clarke quotes the President directing his closest advisers, "We are at war...any barriers in your way, they're gone." Ultra conservative lawyers from the White House and Justice Department -- Alberto Gonzales, Jay Bysbee, and John Woo -- advised Bush that in time of war the President as commander-in-chief took on special powers. For example, he could lawfully order torture. In an August 1, 2002, memo, Bysbee suggested that the President's power was unchecked by Congress. The lawyer argued that any act "that interferes with the president's direction of such core war matter as the detention and interrogation of enemy combatants would thus be unconstitutional." George W made this line of reasoning the cornerstone of Administration policy. It not only justified the use of torture, banned weapons, targeted assassination, and death squads in the war on terror, but also excused abusive domestic policies such as the Patriot Act. This perspective explains why Karl Rove, the President's Machiavellian campaign manager, also serves as Deputy White House Chief of Staff in charge of Policy. Bush believes that he has absolute power as President, but he is also obsessed with conservative ideology. Rove sits in the White House to make sure that every Administration policy and appointment is ideologically pure and enhances their power.
Slowly but surely Democrats on Capitol Hill are finding the gumption to stand up to the Bush scheme for an Imperial presidency. On November 15th, 39 Democratic Senators -- including minority leader Harry Reid and probable 2008 Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton -- voted for a measure written by Michigan Senator Karl Levin. If adopted, the amendment to an appropriations bill would have required President Bush to set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. The measure lost on a mostly party-line vote (five Dems led by pro-war Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut opposed it). However, the near-unity of the minority Party signaled a turning point in opposition to the war.
The strong posture by the Senate Dems forced the Republicans to pass a substitute measure requiring the President to write regular status reports on the Iraqi conflict and designating 2006 as "a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty . . . thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq." While this was much less satisfactory than an actual plan for withdrawal, the Democrats forced the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Republican John Warner of Virginia, to suggest that 2006 would be a "pivotal year" in Iraq and by the end of the year the Iraqi security forces should be ready so that the US can begin to leave.
Tuesday's votes indicated that Democratic leaders are finally recognizing that the war in Iraq is a black hole and that the Administration position, "stay until we win," is untenable. Even former President Bill Clinton -- until recently a staunch defender of the stay-until-we-win philosophy -- on Wednesday characterized the invasion of Iraq as "a big mistake" in a speech to Arab students in Dubai. Now what the Democratic leadership needs to do is to connect the dots between the invasion, torture, incompetent GOP cronies appointed to key positions, corruption in the bidding for reconstruction contracts, and other flagrant Administration abuses of power. To show the public the danger of an imperial presidency where Bush believes he can get away with anything.
Lord John Dalberg-Acton famously observed, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." The Administration of George W. Bush has been corrupted by power and, as a result, seeks to rule absolutely. It is up to the Democratic leadership to attack the imperial Bush presidency. To identify his failure of leadership in Iraq as a symptom of hubris rather than incompetence.