« Cowboy up! | Main | Angst-ing the anniversary of Iraq »

March 18, 2006

How low can he go?

James Carville is credited with saying something to the effect of "when your opponent is sinking, toss him an anvil".

Looks like Bush won't be needing the anvil toss. He's already got an anvil:

A bitterly divided electorate gives President George W. Bush an approval rating of only 36 percent in the latest NEWSWEEK poll, matching the low point in his presidency recorded last November. His image as an effective leader in the war on terror is tarnished, with less than half the public (44 percent) approving of the way he’s handling terrorism and homeland security. Despite a series of presidential speeches meant to bolster support for the war in Iraq, as well as the announcement of a major military offensive when the poll was getting under way, only 29 percent of the people questioned approved Bush’s handling of the situation in Iraq. Fully 65 percent disapprove.

The anvil of Iraq. She is a heavy one.

There's been a lot of chatter about Bush needing to shake up his staff, too. But John Dickerson explains why that won't lighten Bush's load:

The issues that plague the president cannot be fixed in the period before Bush becomes a true lame duck. There could be some deck-chair shuffling, and some fancy names might be brought in, but such moves would do little to affect the underlying issues. Relations with members of Congress can't be fixed fast enough to improve the chances for legislation Bush is pushing. Passing legislation in an election year is tricky enough. It requires trust and a relationship that's built up over time. Republican members of Congress will join with Bush on issues that are popular, but they're going to take no risks. Fred Thompson couldn't change that.

And then there's Iraq, a problem impervious to bombing, let alone staff changes. A shake-up might give the president a brief honeymoon with the press and the public, but both will last only if identifiable progress occurs in Iraq.

This isn't a staff problem. Its a problem with the people in charge who are making the decisions. And that ultimately rests with Bush. Until he's out--nothing is fixed.

And speaking of "staffing problems", Rumsfeld's attempt to defend the Administration's handling of Iraq is spectacularly horrific.

He babbles on about how terrorists are losing in Iraq while failing to awknowledge the sectarian violence and heightened insurgency. He asks readers to consider that a brutal dictator was overthrown (who Rumsfeld happened to appear rather chummy with on at least one occasion) and a new government in place--but ignores the fact that this new government can't even meet long enough to choose a leader or make any fundamental decisions for the country because of their squabbles.

Rumsfeld also asks readers to consider Iraqis security forces and Iraqi Army battalions, yet fails to awknowledge none of the battalions can fight on their own, without American assistance.

Its like reading a Grimms Fairy Tale where someone whitewashed out the bad guys--leaving major pieces of a complex morality tale out for the sake of not scaring the children.

Posted by Carla at March 18, 2006 10:21 PM