The One Term President Conspiracy

Karl Rove may have left the White House but his evil spirit remains. The domestic objective of President Bush's strategy in Iraq is to ensure that the next president -- presumably a Democrat -- is a one-term president.

Unless Congress acts, significant U.S. forces are likely to remain for "3-5 years according to a reputable study done by many members of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group. Three to five years, you mean until the 2010 mid-term elections or the 2012 presidential election? You mean that at least the first half of the new president's term will be consumed by Iraq, probably the whole term.

The new president would thus face continued rancor in Congress and the country and continued gridlock that would probably prevent compromise on immigration or other issues important to the American people. He or she would face a budget situation where the war would eat up any resources that she or he would want to spend on health care, education or infrastructure. In short, the next president's term could look at lot like President Bush's second term.

On the international scene, the new president would have difficulty reversing the decline in respect for the United States. To be sure, Guantanamo could be closed and torture and rendition policies changed. And perhaps a serious effort to move the Israel-Palestine conflict toward resolution might bear fruit. Certainly a more progressive policy on global climate change will restore a modicum of respect. But the essential element for the needed dialogue with our allies and enemies, a restoration of U. S. moral authority, will be tarnished by our continued presence in Iraq. And if domestic deadlock lowers the president's poll rating, his or her standing in the world will diminish along with any ability to get things done.

The new president may also be called to deal with other holes President Bush has dug. The mounting U.S. international debt, especially the dependence on China, could threaten a recession. How long after they have their moment of glory in the Olympic Games next summer will the Chinese government continue to unquestionably purchase treasury bonds at low interest rates? How will the next president deal with the Medicare funding issue?

But the core of the problem is Iraq. The Patrraeus-Bush plan is to keep as many troops in Iraq as long as possible until the next president takes over. The surge troops will of necessity not choice begin leaving in April when their 15 month tours end. The last surge brigade that arrived in May will leave by August. The force will then be down to the pre-surge level and can be maintained there through the election. The new president will inherit a force without a strategy either for success or redeployment.

It will take several months to get a new national security team on board and do the planning and consultation with the Joint Chiefs. At best a safe redeployment can begin in the summer of 2009 and conclude in late 2010 -- coincident with the mid-term elections. If things go badly -- which they are almost certain to do given the bequeathed quagmire -- the Republicans will blame the Democrats for losing Iraq. If they go well, the Republicans will take credit. And the new president will face the prospect of being a one-term president given all the other bequeathed constraints and problems.

Are President Bush and the ghost of Karl Rove consciously setting up the new president to fail? The record would suggest that the answer is "yes." Is there a way out of this blind canyon? The best way is for Congress to force an earlier start and quicker pace to the redeployment. But the votes do not yet seem there for such an action in the 2008 defense authorization or appropriation bills or the pending supplemental request. Something more hard ball needs to be considered. The Bush administration reportedly plans to submit yet another supplemental for Iraq in October, probably on the order of $50 billion.

Congress should put the administration on notice now that the new supplemental request and all future supplemental requests for Iraq will be subject to "pay-go" rules. The administration may propose but congress will impose how the "pay go" rules are met. The first place to look is in Pentagon procurement accounts for weapons systems not needed now for Iraq or the wider war on terror. After that, congress should turn to rolling back tax cuts on the wealthy and correcting current inequalities such as tax rates on hedge fund managers.

If Republicans block "pay go" cuts or the President vetoes them, congress should keep working the supplemental package until he does or the bill dies. It is time for some backbone and the American people will understand that we cannot keep putting the costs of this war on the credit card, especially when they understand that the entire cost of this war has thus been funded so far.

Comments

[nowaterboardUSA]

I have a radical idea I got from the Mexicans. I know the Mexican government for the most part is something to be avoided as a good example of almost anything. However, I think they got 1 think right. One 6 year term for Presidents - no re-elections. I know this would take a constitutional amendment but I think it would eliminate a lot of problems such as 1)wasted time on re-elections that could be spent on the people's business and 2)the second term curse that seems to have afflicted every President we've had whose had a 2nd term in the past 40 years.

[OldKnute]

Well, The second term has a twin blade. You don"t work with the President in term One, there may be hell to pay in term two. Especially if Matching Congress is put in, mid term that would really push things. Again, the will of the people in play. If the President is out of control, the Middies, are a way the voice of the people can be heard.

I am talking of RESTRAINT OF POWER.

As we see recently, incumbency, politicizing the whole dam process, from appointments to firings, to sweeping out career workers and just walking all over the whole process is possible, stuffing ballot CHIPS, hiring nincompoops for the polls, it all is horrible.

NOT about the Peoples business at all!

The one term Presidency?

Umm, then you still have the Lame Duck syndrome, for the last 2 or 3 years.

That would give us a new yield of about 2 to 3 years of effective leadership every 6 years. Factoring out, for a year or so for any manager to find their stride.

I believe in limited and balanced government. I am more a strict Constitutionalist.

Do the job under the LAW, by the LAW and with the LAW in your corner.

Congress is where the lead should come from anyway. They are our representatives and Lawmakers. NOT the PRESIDENT.

The highest dignities to the President, BUT, he should heed and stay close to the advice and counsel of Congress. They are the closest to the PEOPLE! They hear from them every day.

Just my Opinion.

All the best

Knute (Neo-LIB)

If there is NO honor, no integrity, a LUST for power, the whole darn thing breaks down.

[Halsey]

Richard...I've been thinking this for some time..a recession looms..the next President will be blamed for THAT..even thought it began under Clinton (yes...he shares Greenspan!)..but was fomented under W..BUt will be placed on the steps of whomever is elected; as will the morass in Iraq..
I dare say..on this topic..that Biden has the best chance..I hate the idea of partioning.but am beginning to see it as the least horrid of all bad options. (I remains an Edwards backer..but that could change..)
Yup..one term..the era of sacrifice that FDR was able to call on is gone..over...and we have ourselves to blame...we want OURS..NOW!

Please...NO HRC...she ensures! one term...
the poster who said "capture bin Laden"..was exactly RIGHT ON!...do what W couldn't do in 6 years! and don't kill him..(we don't need a martyr of that stature in the radical islam world)..but rather..let him sit in prison for the rest of his life...and nOT guantanamo...me thinks Pelican Bay!...oh yeah...perfect..solitary guaranteed to drive him over the top into complete, mumbling madness...

[OldKnute]

Look, I want a woman President as bad as the next. Just to see social programs turned around. They have the heart for it! But had I a choice, I would LOVE to see Elizabeth Dole.

Now BY GAWD, that"s a WOMAN!

And,,,,,,, let"s not ever, ever question a woman"s ability to lead in war.

You get between a female and her cubs, and WAR is on BUDDY!

WAR IS ON!

Clinton? You think they forgot about Whitewater?

And yes, the Neo-Cons would drag that out in a heartbeat! Like an old shoe, so well worn, but an easy fit.

My thoughts?

There are too many WOMEN voters that are turned off by her. Some think she should have left Bill. (Too calculating for HER OWN future) Some think that Bill strayed because SHE wasn"t taking care of business. Some have had about enough of her shrill, sea-wife rants, "we knows", and whining.

I think the Neo-Cons are just begging for Hillary to be the Dem nomination. Even if they loose, they scrub everything off, BLAMING BOTH CLINTONS for the woes of the world and America.

JMO.

As far as the economy under William, a 5 trillion dollar NEW,,, DOT.com empire of entrepreneurs didn"t hurt us one bit.

That is, until Enron pulled their plug, brown-outs and black-outs and soaring electric prices, till Wall Street was shaken of all confidence in a NEW WAY of doing business and investors came rushing back to Brick and Mortar, tales between their legs.

Bin Laden is a criminal, nothing more. If a women was in, I guarantee bin Laden would be in prison, Fort Knox, I say. For YEARS! See reasoning above!

For the Neo-Cons, bin Laden is a wolf at the door, a Rovian boogieman, to frighten all the Shocker moms and give a target of HATE to all the Armageddon Crusaders and excuse any action they choose.

Any others working on Biden/Kucinich research?

All the best

Knute (Neo-LIB)

[larry278]

When we consider the record of the Democratic majority in the 110th Congress-we have reason to think that any Democrat who replaces W will serve only one term. Boldness & leadership is not a trait of Democrats. The Democrat's donkey is a one trick pony who has mastered rolling over for W & co but nothing else. A Democratic president will be stuck with owning the war on 1/21/09. Regardless of what POTUS #44 does-#44 will get blamed for any adverse results of his/her policies.

[OldKnute]

Now PLEASE.

Be a little fair here. With GWites in every E-mail file, every phone conversation and logged onto all their posts, have you any wonder why they are proceeding with caution?

Get a grip.

With the oversight comities they have assembled quite a lot of counter information on the Rove/Chaney Inner-workings.

Be patient.

Oh and fasten your seatbelts about may, 2008.

In the meantime,,,, Save Wall Street!

Get the Green Economy off and running.

FAST!

All the best

Knute

[larry278]

We can drink to the new POTUS on 1/20/09 with a W cocktail-business on the rocks too. It will be a challenge to deal with a recession too.
Off thread, is there a plan to give Iraqis who aided USA refugee admission to the USA when the USA bugs out of Iraq? We owe it to Iraqis who served us. The blood bath when the USA leaves Iraq will increase in volume. If we bug out of Iraq and don't give a refuge to our friends we may not be able to recruit any residents of the next country the US occupies to aid us.
Oh, yes, I forgot the USA is going to abandon imperialism forever & I'll find 5 C notes under the glass where I put my teeth, too.

[SRegnet]

For all practical purposes, LBJ turned the
Presidency over to the Republicans (in the
form of Dick Nixon), by deciding not to run for
reelection in 1968. Arguably, he did this so
as to end his own involvement in the Vietnam
war, and also in effect to turn that mess over
to the Republicans.

Once Nixon realized he could 'play that thing
out', he had no trouble at all getting re-elected
to a second term, while the war continued on &
while Nixon (& Kissinger) dabbled on to great
effect in foreign affairs.

Of course LBJ did some serious damage to the
Democratic party in other ways, but did he
perhaps suppose that he was doing some serious
damage to the Republicans by 'handing' them
the Vietnam mess? Seems like Nixon was up to
that challenge, but still managed to turn
victory into defeat! How about that?

[OldKnute]

Oh Pashaw!

SR?

The provocateurs at the Dem Convention in 68 insured a Nixon Whitehouse, as did a few glaring extractions from the Social/Political landscape, Martin and Robert.

And please, let"s all do ourselves a HUGE favor.

Let"s try and not confuse Neo-Conquers with any party, current or past. There are a heck of a lot of good Republicans out there, that do not deserve this commingling.

Viet Nam?

Unfortunately, Jack left the door open with his bi-Partisan Whitehouse and cabinet. The BACK door.

If this discussion is to go anywhere it will have to be as animus free, emotionally sterile, and as objective as possible.

OK, next question.

How did the construction of the Empire State Building affect adversely Japanese/American relationships?



All the best

Knute

[Herrington]

Since the topic is political calculation, we can set aside ethics.

Certainly Republicans think they can hand over the war to a Democratic president and then tar same with whatever goes wrong in trying to undo the mess in Iraq. And if the remotest possibility exists that nothing does go wrong, they will make something up.

Sinister enough for you? But wait there is more.

Democrats, using the Iraq war as the centerpiece of their campaigns, will supplant Republicans in the "hearts" of corporate America as the new "winners". Doubt this? Look at the unprecedented lead the Democrats have in contributions. By winning the minds of the public, Democrats put business in the position of having to, perfectly ruthlessly, curry favor with those they see assuming power. Cold as ice.

The Republicans have played their economic voodoo card and no one buys it anymore. Their small government image is shattered. The budget deficit, national debt and trade imbalance argue against the efficacy of their trade and tax policies. Oh and sex scandals have rocked their "family values" shtick. All they have left is "tough on terror", illegal immigration and abortion. How the public feels about the latter two is a tossup. Tough on terror is the issue and there is one thing that can be done that Bush does not realize will redeem any probable withdrawal catastrophe in Iraq.

What the Democratic successor to Bush needs to do is catch bin Laden. Game over and thanks for playing.

[Bozwellian]

Find it amazing that FEW have comprehended the "suchings" as Bush does indeed hand the messes off with NO regrets that most likely a Dem to take the reins next and even hoping too, is Hillary--takes care of several "birds"..(wipes out future notion that a WOMAN of all things COULD govern properly/astutely/etc and why should not be allowed in future thoughts of such positionings merely used for sideline "adornment" facade to appease a few here and there and BONUS, a CLINTON ...a true AHA'ing moment for will be tarnished with the misery that is to follow that is next to impossible to mitigate with great "results" that would be "considered" well done/accomplished and as Bill will be by her side, well, further horse featherings for both for THEIR role in history for all time...) with such, MOST likely whoever gets it, but especially Hillary, will be but a ONE TERMER who gets to take the brunt of the failures that the consequences of the BUSHLERIZED BRIGADE REIGN has wrought down on this nation and is likely figured then, well then the Goperites will be able to slip/slither back in and become the annointed for they WILL cite as examples of how INEPT the Dems are meanwhile Bushie and his Brigade will clamor IF ONLY ALL HAD FOLLOWED THEIR LEAD/DIRECTION/DECISIONS and remind all NOt to blame them for they told us all would end repulsively if did NOT stay their course !!!

[OldKnute]

Yes, and if there is not rioting in the streets over the next 18 months, we might just stave off Martial Law.

Please let it be so!

Me, I"m going to focus on Congress! The FIRST, and most powerful branch of American government.

The executive branch is for the "execution" the will of the people as described and expressed by representative will of the republic and placing one person to perform the duties of Head of State,,,,, UNDER the LAWS.

Our current President seems not to understand these duties, limitations OR responsibilities.

NOT by accident,and I doubt Bush is even aware. The Neo-Con credo, structure and ideology that underpins this rush toward madness.

The war on terror could be turned around if we ALL would return to reliance on the RULE OF LAW! Al Qeada is more of a threat in Muslim lands that it ever was to America. The Saudis have seen this and have launched full scale, "family driven and clergy" interventions to de-program the false Islamic ideologies from those criminals elements captured and get them back on an Islam,,, Path of Peace.

The ultimate would bee these ensuing 8 years bracketed by the Clintons. We already see William painted as the culprit behind bin Laden and 9/11. With Hillary it could be a grand slam. Women in general back in the kitchen, social programs forgotten like a bad dream, FDR cemented over, Kennedy finally swept from the collective consciousness like so many fanciful cobwebs of a lost dream of equality, Martin Luther King, a street renamed, and the glory of it all, the Neo-Conquers rushed in to crown themselves.

That"s IF we survive.

Oh, I must apologize.

Joe Bidon.

I am not sure that he is in the top tier, but if I were in a dark alley, I would sure like him at my back!

Wait!!!

Joe and David?

Hummm?

Never thought of that before. Joseph and David,, Yes I like the sound of that.

I will have to read up on those two guys.

?? ,,,,, Yes,,,,,,,

All the best

Knute

[martinchill]

his name is Dennis, friend.

[OldKnute]

No Duh!

Gosh, Let me rephrase that!

NO DUH!

A Dem would be insane to want to be president!

Social upheavals over wedge issues, education in the toilet, National debt to the roof, infrastructure falling apart, cities in neglect, Katrina still a wasteland, the Iraq war still going strong, possible nuclear aftermaths to deal with in Iraq, Americas ethical and moral standing in the world at rock bottom, the economy on the edge of collapse, the banking industry having to nearly reinvent itself, corporate standards and practices up in the air, everyone arguing rules or principles, the social fabric in tatters, religion, ethics, morality, gender, young and old, all at odds with each other and NOBODY knowing which way to turn, the justice system in quicksand, the Constitution in tatters, the Geneva Conventions a distant memory, immigration with every American taking sides, shouting yelling and just acting like jerks, the global climate and weather mad at everyone.

NO DUH!

Hilary, Obama, Gore, Dodd, Kerry, Edwards,,,, even that nice little fellow.. Umm? David Kucinich.

They are all either the bravest people on earth,,, or just plain NUTS!

AND no, I am NOT an advocate for just GIVING UP.

NEVER GIVE UP ON AMERICA!

I may not be a Republican anymore, but I am sure as heck still going to VOTE! Independent.

But with the RepubliCan"ts dragging their feet on everything, bin Laden running around, blocking every vote, scarring the heck out of America, seeing enemies under every rock, prolonging the war, bombing Iran, the Democrats are going to inherit a whirlwind of a disaster.

Probably impeachment, 3 years on.

No DUH!

All the best

Knute

[Sumocat]

The Bush Administration is a rogue group even within the Republican party. I believe Bush planned on screwing whoever was the next President, regardless of party affiliation. The man's legendary loyalty is strong within his gang, but does not extend beyond it.

[Doofus]

But the good news is, it will take much longer
than one term to undo all the wreckage GWB has
created while in office.

So, incoming Demo President, whoever you may be,
you are most fortunate to have been granted
many, many wonderful OPPORTUNITIES!

With luck, *you* will be our next FDR.

[Neuromancer13]

Now that's what I call making lemonade!

[CornellRedneck]

Doofus, you're right! To paraphrase the Chinese curse, "may the next Dem president have an interesting life!"