Was Amnesty Bill a Strategery? - VANITY

FR ^ | 6/9/06 | jebeier

[jebeier]

Perhaps this whole Amnesty business is a sublime and supremely cunning strategery.

Now, I know you all may want to dismiss the possibility out of hand, but bear with me for a moment...

By promoting this bill, in one fell swoop President Bush has managed to:

a) Get almost the entire Democrat caucus in the Senate to come out in favor of Amnesty, which is very unpopular,
b) Forever link his old arch-nemesis, John McCain, to this very unpopular bill,
c) Get somewhere close to 80% of Americans to oppose Ted Kennedy, and
d) Kill the possibility of comprehensive immigration reform for the forseeable future.

And all it has cost him is a few points in the public opinion polls, which is irrelevant because he will never run for office again.

Now the Republican field (except John McCain) can run against the President of their own party in 2008 by opposing him on this issue. The 800 pound Iraqi gorrilla has been replaced by a 1600 pound illegal immigration gorilla. And the vast majority of Republicans (besides John McCain) are in a much better position to debate on this issue.

Sarkozy just won in France by running against Chirac, who was the head of his own party. Perhaps the White House has taken that lesson to heart.

If it is strategery, it is exceptionally subtle and devious, and would be a masterpiece. But they really couldn't possibly be that clever, could they?

Or could they? One thing we know about President Bush is that he has a long memory and likes to get even with his enemies. Look at the seven Republican Senators who are going to come out on the down side of this deal:

Graham (R-SC)- Led efforts to extend habeus corpus rights to Guantanamo detainees. Member of Gang of 14

Hagel (R-NE) - Led charges against Iraq, Patriot Act, Rumsfeld, the Surge and Karl Rove

Lugar (R-IN) - Led efforts against intelligence operations against foreign agents in the US

Martinez (R-FL) - Leaked the Schiavo memo, but otherwise does not fit the pattern

McCain (R-AZ) - Back stabbings too numerous to count

Specter (R-PA) - Ditto. From “Scottish Law” onward

Voinovich (R-OH) - Led charge against John Bolton and the Surge

All of these Senators are going to be hurt by taking a position on the wrong side of this issue, and all of them, except Mel Martinez, have been thorns in President Bush’s side for a long, long time.

One has to ask oneself, cui bono? Who benefits? I submit to you that the biggest beneficiary of this debacle is none other than President George W. Bush himself.

[jebeier]

There are four quadrants in the Bush is stupid and evil tautology:

1. Bush is Stupid and Evil
2. Bush is Smart and Evil
3. Bush is Stupid and Good
4. Bush is Smart and Good

You seem to favor #1. That would more or less explain the current situation, so it is certainly a possibility.

I think #2 is right out. If he were smart he would have not made such a colossal mistake.

Similarly, #3 doesn’t make much sense, because why would a simple but good person do things that are evil.

However, #4 is a possibility, and is the premise of this thread. If Bush was smart and good, he could be advancing this bill, knowing that it is evil, but also knowing the Democrats will find it irresistible. He can then get the Democrats (and certain Republicans who he is not particularly fond of) to climb waaaaay out on a limb. At that point, it is simply a matter of sawing off the limb.

We have seen it over and over again over the past seven years. When somebody goes out on a limb and it gets sawn off, inevitably the saw has been in President Bush’s hand.

[jebeier]

Also, #4 presupposes that President Bush does not give a fig about what people think of him and is willing to drive his approval numbers into the negative “Dentists who recommend sugary gum” territory.

I wouldn’t say that is outside the realm of possibility, either.

[azhenfud]

The strategy?

Hardheadedness.

[Kozak]

but to openly call the american people names who are against this....i thought this was a way to rally the base, and hopefully prevent 2006 from happening in 2008..

If so it's an "interesting" strategery. ANYONE here MORE likely to vote, work for or donate to the GOP after this fiasco?

Anyone?

[COBOL2Java]

A paraphrase of one of my favorite tag lines... Never ascribe to evil intent that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Who said that, originally?

Hanlon's Razor

[Museum Twenty]

Yup. Shhh!! LLSS.

Number One priority is Iraq. Where progress is being made.

However, when Iraq is in the spotlight, all those who oppose that mission get attention and airtime, the enemy in Iraq gets encouraged, and more American lives are lost.

By running this dog of a bill up the flagpole again, the opposition to the Mission in Iraq continue to be distracted, the media focus stays away from Iraq, and the lives of soldiers are saved.

I honestly believe the Pres does not give a rat’s rear about his rating, while caring infinitely about those troops. I’d say the same for Rumsfeld as well.

[Tenniel2]

Yep... and Hitlery's the smartest woman in the world.

Granted, the outcomes of W's first few near-fiascos could be read as the fruits of Machiarrovian machinations, but now it's old William of Occam's turn.

But thanks for the diversion, on a day that sorely needs one.

[Tenniel2]

Again, it’s a nice construct, and I’d like to believe you. But the problem with your dismissal of option 3 is that a sufficiently stupid person woouldn’t know the difference between good and evil, and that, I very much fear, is where GWB sits.

[jebeier]

I just don’t buy President Bush as being that stupid.

Maybe he is, though.

Anyway, that is a thread that is only fit to start on a Friday afternoon...

[Principled]

Actually I have considered the same thing and posted it as a comment in some thread.

My comment ended with "Naaaaa...." and received much of the same disdain your post has/is.

While it is a possibility, one must remember Bush has wanted something like this for years - which may void our assertion - but the two are not mutually exclusive - he could've seen the opportunity and resolved that any outcome would be good for him or the party - just not both...that is, he had nothing to lose.

Thoughts?

[jebeier]

That is an interesting analysis. Either the base rises up and goes into 2008 energized, kickin' butt and not taking no for an answer or President Bush gets the immigration reform he's wanted all along.

I do think the White House games these things out, very skillfully. Perhaps you are onto something, here.

[WashingtonSource]

too clever by half

[Colorado Doug]

I thought perhaps they are slipping something under the table while we are all focused on this.

No, too much work has gone into it highways through Texas etc. I think the idea was to slip this through while we were focused on the War On Terror. The WOT is not half the danger to this country that the immigration bill is.

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

Glad you picked that up. That little comment of mine sat unnoticed for 5 days.

The point is that I thought at the time, and perhaps still do, that something else is up.

Its good to know others think the same way :)

[Barney Gumble]

Was defaming the conservative base also part of the grand strategy?

So many Bush bots are tempted to say, "say it isn''t so, George." It's all part of Rove's master strategy instead of the plain truth that GW is an elitist and sold out despite the faked Texan accent.

[Laur]

One thing we know about President Bush is that he has a long memory and likes to get even with his enemies

We do? He does? If so, he’s kept it hidden for the past 7 years. I WISH it were true, but he keeps turning the other cheek.

[RockinRight]

In 2003, I would have bought this argument.

Not now.

Perhaps your list was an unintended/unforseen positive of the bill, but I unfortunately doubt that was W’s intent, as much as I wish it were.

[Gondring]

ping

[Agrarian]

Sorry, if W wanted good immigration policy, he would have been enforcing the law for the last 6 years.

Clinton deported more illegals in any single year of his Presidency than Bush did in his entire first term. Bush has only had some highly publicized raids when legislation is pending. People aren’t being fooled this time. Read the article in National Review by John O’Sullivan.

And that is post 9/11, when Bush was supposedly making America’s security #1. Obviously, cheap labor is more important than security in his mind. That is why there is so much furor over this. We now know that there are things that W will put in front of protecting us.

So why did we swallow the Patriot Act, etc.?

I used to think that W and Rove planned the whole Miers/Alito thing to get Alito in.

Now I’m not so sure — this immigration business makes me wonder if Bush really wanted Miers, and that we just got lucky that the base revolted. It was us who made Alito happen, and it will be us that stops immigration “reform” madness.

[logcabinman]

I thought the immigration issue was a set up from the beginning. FReeper took me to the gallows and immediately crowned me as a Bush-bot. I know Rove is smarter than most Democrats, maybe their not the only ones that take the bait and run.