[Mb-civic] Can Bush change? - Scot Lehigh - Boston Globe Op-Ed

[William Swiggard]

Can Bush change?

By Scot Lehigh, Globe Columnist  |  November 1, 2005

FORTY-THREE is starting to sound and look an awful lot like 42.

Rocked by sexual scandal, Bill Clinton made it his mantra that he was 
focusing on the job the American people had hired him to do. And he kept 
moving energetically forward.

Even before Scooter Libby's indictment, George W. Bush had taken to 
talking about his distraction-conquering dedication to his job. ''The 
American people expect me to do my job, and I'm going to," he declared.

Now that perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Dick 
Cheney's chief of staff have brought the controversy in close, the 
president has moved to shift the media spotlight in other directions, as 
he did yesterday in nominating a federal appeals court judge, Samuel 
Alito, to the Supreme Court.

The White House obviously hopes that in pushing steadily ahead, Bush, 
like Reagan and (eventually) Clinton, can regain the nation's approval.

Don't count on it.

Why? Because this president seems characterologically incapable of doing 
the things it needs to do to have a legitimate shot at restoring public 
trust.

The first is expressing contrition. In the aftermath of the Iran-contra 
scandal, Ronald Reagan offered a manful mea culpa, assuming full 
responsibility and taking steps to correct the abuses that had tarnished 
his administration. Clinton also did it, confessing to ''a critical 
lapse in judgment and a personal failure" in his affair with Monica 
Lewinsky and admitting he had misled the nation in his previous denials 
of a sexual relationship.

In both cases, an acknowledgment of fault was a prerequisite to moving 
beyond the controversies.

Even if he weren't a man defined by a stubborn reluctance to admit 
error, Bush would still be unlikely to follow those examples. One basic 
requirement for true public redemption in a situation like this would 
hold him back.

That's the need to provide a fuller accounting of unsavory happenings. 
With what the nation has gleaned from Libby's indictment, it's clear 
that the White House, and Cheney's office in particular, made a 
concerted effort to discover the details about former ambassador Joseph 
Wilson's fact-finding trip to Niger. We also know that the effort 
included Cheney himself -- and that it was the VP who learned, and who 
told Libby, that Valerie Plame Wilson was employed by the CIA's 
counterproliferation division, employment that strongly suggested her 
classified status.

According to the indictment, during a July 12, 2003, trip on Air Force 
Two with Cheney, Libby talked ''with other officials aboard the plane" 
about how to respond to media inquiries. That trip came just before 
Libby had conversations about Wilson's wife with several reporters.

Thus a true accounting would have to focus on the role the vice 
president played in efforts to intimidate Wilson or undercut his 
criticism. It would also mean an effort to move the White House out from 
under the long shadow of Cheney's influence. Again, don't count on it.

Further, to truly restore public confidence, there would have to be an 
honest effort to start anew, which would require more than simply 
accepting Libby's resignation. It would mean a tactics transplant for an 
administration that behind the scenes has long played a few-holds-barred 
brand of Texas scald 'em. Libby is hardly the only, or even the prime, 
practitioner of that kind of politics, of course. Karl Rove, the 
president's alter ego, is famous for it.

Finally, to regain lost ground with the public, Bush would have to adopt 
a centrist approach to addressing the nation's problems. That, in turn, 
would mean standing up to the ideologues and activists in the Republican 
base -- at the very moment when that base is growing ever more demanding.

Successful in scotching the nomination of Harriet Miers to the high 
court, conservatives have made it clear they will step up their demands 
on the president. And if Bush & Co. are true to form, their response 
will be to reinforce the base, not to rebuff it. Indeed, rallying the 
base is what the nomination of Alito, a conservative favorite, seems 
designed to do.

But restive as the right may be, it's the middle that Bush has lost -- 
and a president can't veer toward a conservative base and hope to regain 
the center.

So though we'll certainly see an intensified public relations campaign 
from the White House, it will be driven by a desire to switch topics, 
not tactics. And though it may alter the discussion, if past is 
prologue, it won't change the direction.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/11/01/can_bush_change/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20051101/8e7e6071/attachment.htm