Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Message to the Man in the White House Bunker

By William Greider, The Nation. Posted March 30, 2007.


By voting to set a deadline for exiting Iraq, the House and Senate have heeded the American people's call to end the war. But will the man in the White House bunker get the message?
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Take a deep breath. The nation has arrived at an extraordinary political moment. The Congress is about to instruct the President he should withdraw from the ongoing war. Yes, I know the fine print in the House and Senate versions has lots of wiggle room. But the congressional action is still breathtaking when you think about it, possibly without historic precedent.

I assumed it would take many months and numerous failed efforts for the new Democratic majority to reach this juncture. When House leaders kept softening their terms, I even thought it might be a good thing for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to lose the first time around. She would then be assailed by outraged Americans and get the message: stiffen up, this is not business as usual. I was mistaken. Many of the final details are disappointing, but the message has been delivered and received–get out of Iraq. It will rule politics until the American exit actually occurs.

Democrats did not create this new dynamic–it arose volcano-like from the American people–but Democrats have had the wisdom to embrace it. I remember the torturous struggle in the Sixties waged by congressional opponents–Republicans and Democrats–trying to end the war in Vietnam. Their first resolutions were mild and deferential, politely urging Lyndon Johnson to start negotiating for peace. They were rejected. Subsequent measures raised the ante, but it took years of frustrating failure to get Congress to speak clearly. By comparison, the shift in politics this time moved like lightning.

Democrats now have the Republicans in a political vise and will keep squeezing them. Let Bush veto whatever anti-war measure House and Senate finally produce. Let the president’s GOP troops uphold his veto. Democrats will then rally for another legislative assault on the willfully blind chief executive. Each new roll call will stick it again to the Republicans. Do they want to stand with the public’s common-sense grasp of reality? Or are they going to keep voting with the crackpot commander-in-chief and his delusional search for victory?

The guy in the bunker, unfortunately, may never get the message. That deepens the tragedy, both for America and Iraq. Each new needless death will deepen the hurt and anger. But it looks like George W. Bush will stick with denial, even as Congress keeps toughening its attempts to force withdrawal. I hope I am wrong about that, but a wise friend explained the logic of Bush’s desperation politics.

Bush and Cheney, he said, are trying to run out the clock–keep this war going until they leave office and can dump the mess on the next president, very likely a Democrat. In retirement, the Bush crowd will then begin to sow the “if only” revisionism that blames Democrats or the media or the American people for a “loss of will.” Sounds absurd now, but that is roughly what happened after the lost war in Vietnam. We could have won, “if only.” Sad to say, many Americans came to believe it, especially resentful veterans seeking explanation for why they fought and lost.

Given all he has done to this country, Bush could do something truly valuable for history by accepting the blame in a stand-up way. Admit his great errors. Acknowledge the failure. This might ensure him a tragic but noble legacy. I am afraid there is nothing noble in the man.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: iraq, democrats, white house, george bush

William Greider is the Nation's national affairs correspondent.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The Unknown Darkness of Bush´s mind
Posted by: ZPaul on Mar 30, 2007 1:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Given all he has done to this country, Bush could do something truly valuable for history by accepting the blame in a stand-up way. Admit his great errors. Acknowledge the failure. This might ensure him a tragic but noble legacy. I am afraid there is nothing noble in the man."
I´m afraid so, too. I´m also afraid he´s going to do something really crazy. I hope not. But at this point, what is going on in the dark recesses of that mind? I don´t know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: VETO NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: VETO NOW Posted by: kbest
» RE: VETO NOW Posted by: barn
» Reality check Posted by: andyc
» RE: eality check Posted by: yellow
Let's wait for the other shoe to drop before we celebrate
Posted by: Moonray on Mar 30, 2007 3:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The key question is: What will Democrats do after Bush vetoes the funding bill? Maybe I'm cynical, but I'll bet that it won't be much. Democratic leaders had to make some sort of gesture to appease the public, but their bread is buttered by big-money folks in New York and Los Angeles who kinda like W's "war on terror" -- or maybe they just kinda like war in general.

What these leaders do next will really tell us whether the Dem leadership is serious or just posturing. The Dems need to refuse to fund the war unless the final legislation has significant restrictions -- such as a fairly brief timeline for withdrawing virtually all troops, not just combat troops, or easily verifiable goals and benchmarks.

What we'll probably get is some weasel-worded language that will allow the Bushies to continue doing whatever they want. And, of course, if we go to war with Iran, as seems likely, the Dems probably will roll over, salute the flag and give W another blank check.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Most Human Beings
Posted by: pcushniesr on Mar 30, 2007 3:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most human beings could not live with being so despised by an entire world. Most human beings could not sleep at night knowing they were responsible for rivers of blood that have flowed because of them. Most human beings could not tolerate so much corruption in their personal lives. Most would be driven to nervouse breakdowns or insanity if, by some black magic, they had had to live in Bush's head for a day. The viper pit, the reckless evil, the screaming emptiness of this creature's inhumanity, are the stigmata of the deeply impaired, the less than human. I do not believe in hell, but if I did, I would wish for Bush and his cabal to rot there after their own personal end of days. No rapture for you, George Bush. Just the continuation of the rot and stink you wore in life. I personally would be happy to piss on your grave, but I don't like standing in long lines.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Most Human Beings Posted by: Io
» RE: Most Human Beings Posted by: Ellie1
lost cause
Posted by: solrev on Mar 30, 2007 4:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no way Bush, Chaney and NWO will leave Iraq. Giving up control of the Iraq oil fields will cause the economic collapse of the United States if the wrong people get control. The NWO is planning the collapse of the United States; they just want it on their timetable. They are not stupid and they know the environmental destruction of the planet will occur if the remaining oil is dumped into the atmosphere at current and increasing rates. The smart thing to do is conserve. The easiest way to do that is to eliminate the biggest polluter. It is great to see Halliburton views the probability of success in Iraq as very low. Halliburton is making moves so that they can stay in the game if the US fails in Iraq. As for the Democrats they seem to be more concerned with elections than actually doing anything of value for the future of we the people. This means that the NWO still has control. There is just not enough homegrown local politicians being elected. If the NWO is as smart as I think they are, They will let some homegrown politicians win in 2008 but elect a republican president. How can they elect a republican president? Simple, run an unelectable democrat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush & Cheney, PNAC believers with peanut minds
Posted by: HughScott on Mar 30, 2007 4:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Iraq war supporters and Americans sitting on the fence should remember who Bush and Cheney are:

The Veep is a founder of the neoconservative front organization, Project for a New American Century (PNAC), formed in 1997. Other original PNAC members (“signatories”) include Cheney’s fellow Gulf War 2 architects Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Scooter Libby and former U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad. President Bush is surrogately connected to PNAC through his brother, Jeb, an original PNAC member.

As PNAC signatories, the White House Gang approved the organization's published goal of invading Iraq before 9/11. Issued in 2000, the PNAC position paper eerily predicted that the first preemptive war in U.S. history would be supported by the American people if they suffered a "catastrophic and catalyzing Pearl Harbor-type event" (PNAC's words). Thus, to Bush and his neocon cabal, 9/11 was an excuse to attack Iraq, not a cause.

Forget about withdrawal deadlines, no matter how reasonable. PNAC hawks want our troops in Iraq forever, stationed at permanent (“enduring”) bases throughout the country. It makes no difference to Bush and Cheney that the king of Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda’s breeding ground, wants all U.S. forces out of Iraq ASAP.

Does His Highness know something that Bush and his side-talking sidekick don't?

Stupid question.

For a list of 225 PNAC signatories including rightwing Democrats, visit King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"George Bush is insane"
Posted by: Arvy on Mar 30, 2007 6:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A short article from Harold Pinter on znet:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?
SectionID=72&ItemID=12453

The link is split as usual…

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "George Bush is insane Posted by: sasquuatch55
» RE: "George Bush is insane" Posted by: VZEQICVA
Look, it's simple; he vetoes, he loses
Posted by: xbj on Mar 30, 2007 7:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's why:

He's running on only 23% support when it comes to his war.

If he vetos this appropriation bill, and sends it back to Congress, they can blame it 100% on him. Period. Buck stops at the White House. The Democrats can then STOP ANY LEGISLATION that doesn't have all the checks and balances they put into it from happening. DAMN RIGHT it will cut off funding... cut off throw away funding to Haliburton et al. Stop the gravy train dead in its tracks BY BLOWING UP THE TRACK.

End of story. The White House can piss and moan all they want about "They didn't support the troops" BUT ONLY 23% OF AMERICA IS LISTENING. They've LOST the war for hearts and minds a LONG time ago.

So HOLD FAST. DON'T GIVE IN. Don't give him the money UNLESS IT'S ON YOUR TERMS, it's that simple. Let him and Rove and Cheney and Rice PAY FOR IT OUT OF THEIR GODDAMNED HALIBURTON PORTFOLIO PROFITS.

And that's the way the MAJORITY of America sees it.

OF COURSE the polls say a much higher of percentage of Americans don't want funding for the troops cut off... but who would answer that question "Yes"?? It's all how the question is asked.

On the other hand, if you ask the average American "Do you want Congress to keep throwing good money after bad and throwing money away to Haliburton?" of course you get a different answer.

So do it, and don't be afraid. 40% of the people who SAY they wouldn't want funding cut off for the troops would CHEER if Congress did. The question is like asking someone if they love their Mother...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» How do you define win? Posted by: andyc
» RE: Most Americans want to win.... Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Look, it's simple; he vetoes, he loses Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Mar 30, 2007 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's slow going but starting to work, considering that we're trying to move a mountain. Maybe we need a child psychologist to help us. Bush is nothing more than an out of control contemptible brat who is still 8 yrs. old and needs his mommy. Treating him like an adult is a waste of time. He has no idea what anyone is talking about, and some of the things he says are worrisome. The War in Iraq is his personal game.
I wish we could move faster. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» We can move faster Posted by: b253@yahoo.com
Bush was never legally elected - he doesn't care what 'the public' thinks
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Mar 30, 2007 12:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is probably the main reason that he needs to be impeached, and also why he believes in the dictatorial unilateral presidency. He knows he was placed in power by a right wing cabal with access to billions in cash, as well as by the most corrupt Supreme Court in modern history (the real 2000 presidential vote was 5 ayes, 4 nays).

That's why it is necessary to impeach Cheney and Bush before they do even more harm. If they knew about an impending terrorist attack on US soil, I firmly believe they would do nothing to stop it, and might even try to encourage it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Vetoed...
Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive on Mar 30, 2007 1:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Democratic party should modify a few things but NOT the Timed Get Out clauses and resubmit the bill again. Make this asshole monkey keep on vetoing. The funds will dry up and the end result is what we want. Get them out of Iraq and home or redeployed. The Democrats have the hammer. They must use it!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: If Vetoed... Posted by: barn
» RE: If Vetoed... Posted by: Sparks56
The Devil And The Deep Blue Sea
Posted by: Sparks56 on Mar 31, 2007 4:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Republicans are indeed caught in a vice. If they stick with the president, they could hand the Democrats a fillibuster-proof majority in Congress in 2008. A Democratic super-majority, with Hillary in the White House, must be a truly terrifying prospect to the Republicans, especially the conservatives and bible bangers. Ironically, these are the very people who have most staunchly supported Bush and his policies. (Gawd, dontcha just luv it!)
The Republicans have two choices; stick with the president and pray for heavenly intervention in the Middle East, or abandon support for the administration in order to maintain some kind of bargaining power with whoever the next president is. (It will be a Democrat.) The first choice will be more and more difficult as the crescendo of scandals, (i.e. political manipulation of US attorneys, Walter Reed abuse of wounded veterans, FBI abuse of the Patriot Act, etc. etc. etc.) and the subsequent hearings and investigations, firings and resignations, (Adios, Gonzales) gets louder and louder. Add to this the steady, daily, eternal, drumbeat of bloody bad news from Iraq, add to this economic chickens coming home to roost, (pop goes the housing bubble), add to this the growing concensus on global warming, add to this the growing health care crisis. The Republican's vice squeezes tighter every day.
It is breathtaking to contemplate what has happened to the Party of Abraham Lincoln in so short a time.
Great legacy, George!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Three Card Monte!
Posted by: Jersey Devil on Mar 31, 2007 10:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With the Pentagon getting hundreds of billions in funding for star wars, billion dollar planes, ships that sink, and $600 toilet seats - let them take some of their regular budget and use it in Iraq. Let George cancel his tax cuts for the rich and use that money. Just don't fall into the "emergency funding" trap. Iraq is not an emergency, it is a cluster-f*@king disaster.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement