Lamest Duck  

VancouverBoy69 36M
12 posts
5/18/2006 11:26 am
Lamest Duck

So, Mr. Bush had his little speech on immigration reform. Nothing suprising there. He pretty much told us he was going to do what he had already said he was going to do. I have mixed emotions about militarization of the Mexican border. On the one hand, it flies in the face of what the founding fathers intended America to be: a land of opportunity where anyone can come to make a new start, regardless of race, sex or religion. On the other hand, its nice to see National Guard troops doing what they're supposed to be doing. That is to say, national guard, rather than marching across some foreign desert in a hegemonic war.

What I find paticularly interesting, is the challenge Bush faced in appeasing both the fiscal right (who love having the less-than-minimum-wage Mexican workers who can't complain about unsafe working conditions) and the religious right (who want the illegals out because the don't speak God's language: English). Unlike issues of abortion and gay rights, Bush's base is divided on this which puts him in a difficult position: he has to figure out who his true master is, big business or Jerry Falwell and his ilk. His Republican support in congress is facing much the same dilemma. Congressional Republicans have sided with the religious right, by and large. Mr. Bush seems to have chosen business (Bush decided not to round up the illegal immigrants and deport them, a plan which many powerful congressional Republicans support).

The combination of his continually dropping poll numbers and the fact that Mr. Bush now faces a divided Republican party in congress means he is going to have a hell of a time passing any legislation that the Democrats can't get onboard with. Hence, his guest-worker program. All of this will become even more difficult for him when the Democrats, in all likelyhood, retake the House and Senate in the November midterms. What does all this boil down to? Bush is a lame duck. Unlike the prime ministerial power he exercised over congress in his first term (post-9/11) he is going to have trouble doing much beyond passing a budget and getting money to fund operations in Iraq. For Bush supporters, this is terrible news. For the rest of us (what I call the sane part of the world) this means we can look forward to 3 relatively boring years from the Bush administration. He had a good run, he managed to appoint a new chief justice (fucking wacko) and associate justice (fucking loser) to the supreme court, as well as imposing legislation that dismantles the rights the founding fathers held so dear, and even got his own little pet project where he got to get back at the man who "tried to kill [his] dad." But not even Beelzebub himself (*cough* Karl Rove *cough*)can rescue Bush from his Nixon-like approval ratings. This likely means no sweeping reforms on abortion or gay marriage, and no invasion of Iran, probably until 2008 (barring any major world changes of course).

This places all that much more importance on the 2008 election where we will likely see the first female to hold an executive position (vice-presidents Rice or Clinton, methinks). If the Republicans win (President Frist *shudder*), expect to see a quick build up for Iran and possibly death camps for homosexuals. If the Democrats manage to find a purpose and a campaign slogan that goes beyond "we're not the Republicans" we won't see Iran happen (again, barring Iranian hostility towards the US or Israel) but we probably won't get much else out of a Democrat administration except possible healthcare and welfare reform. Of course, we can always hope for another FDR, but the days of intelligent and principled politicians are over. People want someone in charge who is just as much of a dumbass as they are, someone who can pander to whomever will serve them best. Someone like George W. Bush.

Become a member to create a blog