Lame duck? What lame duck?

Lame duck?2007 turned out to be a pretty good year for George W. Bush.

Late last year, voters turfed Republicans out of Congress over either lack of spending restraint or dissatisfaction with progress in Iraq or both, depending who you ask. (Robert Novak: war; Alan Greenspan: spending; Rush Limbaugh: both, and liberals suck; Reason magazine: both, and government sucks.)

This electoral loss, which meant Bush could no longer rely on a compliant Congress to send him only bills he likes, merely reinforced the view that Bush now is a lame duck, unable to govern effectively. (CNN: Is Bush already a lame duck?; Lou Dobbs: Beware the lame duck; The Guardian: ‘Lame duck’ Bush faces struggle to push through new agenda; The Telegraph: Allies desert ‘lame duck president’; Dan Froomkin: How lame a duck?)

A few voices ran against the media herd, but looked like wishful thinkers. (Christian Science Monitor: Bush’s lame-duck advantage.)

But on Friday, Stephen Moore of the Wall Street Journal, and Steve Huntley of the Chicago Sun-Times (apparently independently) noted that Bush hasn’t had a bad 2007 at all. Moore’s item is worth quoting in its entirety:

Bush on the Comeback Trail

Just as Newt Gingrich was the best thing that ever happened to Bill Clinton, so Nancy Pelosi has become a great political asset to George W. Bush. Mr. Bush is on a roll legislatively and even his poll numbers are inching up while Congress’s have sunk into the teens. There’s nothing like having a foil in Congress to rehabilitate a president. Just ask Harry Truman.

This time last year it would have been inconceivable that Mr. Bush would have a successful 2007, or that Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Congress would have fewer than one-in-four voters approving their performance. I’ve made a list of Mr. Bush’s policy victories over the Democrats:

  1. S-CHIP — Mr. Bush vetoed the Democrats’ bill expanding middle-class health care subsidies and Democrats were unable to override that veto.
  2. Alternative Minimum Tax — Democrats passed AMT reform without the offsetting tax hikes they had threatened.
  3. Energy bill — What was a monster at the beginning of the year is now just a fairly harmless CAFE standards bill. Environmentalists are fuming.
  4. Hate Crimes Legislation — Mr. Bush blocked it. The Congressional Black Caucus is furious.
  5. War funding — Mr. Bush prevailed without any pull-out date. At the start of the year this looked impossible.
  6. The Budget — Mr. Bush mostly prevailed on domestic spending totals.
  7. No new taxes — all of the Democratic tax proposals were killed, including tobacco taxes, hedge fund taxes and energy company taxes.

It pretty much looks like the White House ran the table. Merry Christmas, Madam Speaker.

As I’ve noted before, US economic and foreign policies matter most to me as a foreigner: whether Americans permit gays to be married, guns to be carried or God to be harried doesn’t keep me up at night.

During the 2004 presidential elections, I said to a friend that perhaps the US needs a presidential term under a Democrat, if only to remind the people in general (and Republican voters in particular) that the Democrats aren’t very good at low taxes, low spending, light-touch environmental regulation and effective foreign policy. Either a John Kerry in 2004, or a Hillary Clinton in 2008, would achieve this goal, and as a result, cement the longer-term rise of the GOP. It now appears that Nancy Pelosi, the San Francisco leftist in charge of the ineffectual Democratic Congress, may have achievedachieve this in just two years. Especially if the Democrats nominate Clinton (admittedly, Dennis Kucinich would do too), my money’s on a Republican presidential election win just less than a year from now.

Update: Repaired a grammatic blunder in stating Nancy Pelosi’s term: either she “may have achieved it in just one year”, or she “may achieve it in just two years” — my phrasing was inconsistent, and the former may yet be undone by a sparkling Congressional performance in 2008 (when Martians may land and I may win the lottery).

Like it? Please spike it: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • muti
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • Fark
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • TailRank
  • SphereIt
Similar spikes:

5 comments so far

  1. Hard Rain December 24, 2007 17:39

    I’m sure more than a few people can remember the infamous Jimmy Carter administration… How much since those days has changed within Democratic Party mainstream policy?

  2. Ivo Vegter December 24, 2007 18:18

    I don’t know, how much has changed? When last did you hear any actual policy from the Democrats?

    All I hear is wishful thinking: We’ll bring peace to Iraq! We’ll provide universal healthcare, just like that! We’ll fix social security, and make nobody pay! We’ll abolish income inequality, George Soros style! We’ll make the immigrant problem go away without making immigrants go away! We’ll earn respect in the world by protecting American jobs from greedy, low-wage foreign workers! We’ll change the climate! We’ll make the terrorists love America by being nice to them! We’ll make the French love America by being nice to them! And if any of this doesn’t happen, we’ll blame George Bush and the vast right-wing conspiracy.

    It’s a grab bag of populist niceties, with precious few hints on how they’ll be achieved, or even whether they’re achievable. So no, inasmuch as one can discern any coherent Democratic Party policy, I guess not much has changed.

  3. nuke December 24, 2007 19:31

    sorry to be off-topic. Just wanted to drop by and say Merry Christmas Ivo, to you and all your readers.
    Nuke

  4. Hard Rain December 25, 2007 0:00

    I thought the DP policy was always “We can achieve anything with higher taxes… That’s about it.” :D

  5. Ivo Vegter December 26, 2007 12:31

    Hey, Mr Gingrich. Belated thanks for the Christmas wishes.

Leave a comment

Please be polite and on topic. Your e-mail is needed to help verify you are not a spam-bot, and rarely if I need to contact you privately. It will never be published, abused or disclosed to anyone.

Please be aware that first-time commenters, as determined by your name and e-mail, are moderated. This unconscionable attack on your freedom of speech is regrettable, but since it helps combat the spam flood, it is non-negotiable. Please do not submit your comment twice. It will appear as soon as I see it in the moderation queue.