Bush Shows He Can Turn on a Dime

[one...two...tree 2,762]

By Michael Abramowitz

Washington Post Staff Writer

For five years, ever since the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush has pursued the war in Iraq, his legislative agenda and his policies for fighting terrorism with a single-mindedness that inspired admiration among the Republican faithful -- and, if the election results are an accurate gauge, increasing consternation among the American public.

This afternoon, Bush showed that he could turn on a dime if necessary: Bush ousted Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld only a week after telling reporters he would stay through the end of the administration. And he voiced great willingness to work with Democrats on Capitol Hill, following an election campaign in which he regularly impugned the opposition for policies he said could weaken America and lead to the victory of terrorists.

At a news conference today, Bush made clear that had heard the results of Tuesday's stunning election results, which left Bush facing not only a House but also, possibly, a Senate in the hands of the opposition party -- should the narrow Democratic lead in Virginia hold up.

Bush offered an unusual dose of self-criticism, saying he shares a "large part of the responsibility" for Tuesday's GOP election debacle. He said he hopes to find "common ground" with the Democrats and he wanted a "fresh perspective" at the Pentagon. Asked how he could work with the Democrats after harsh rhetoric on both sides, Bush replied: "I've been around politics a long time; I understand when campaigns end, and I know when governing begins. And I am going to work with people of both parties."

The new rhetoric reflected the hard reality that if Bush hopes to accomplish any significant initiative in the last two years of his term, he will almost certainly have to rethink a legislative and political strategy that for the past five years depended almost entirely on Republican votes for success.

With Democrats evidently anxious to show that they have matured as a governing party, the opportunity may be there for the president to reach accommodation with the opposition before he leaves the White House in two years. William A. Galston, a top Democratic strategist from the centrist wing of the party, said in an interview before the news conference that prospects for the kind of broad immigration reform the president wants -- tough enforcement coupled with some kind of pathway to citizenship for long-time illegal immigrants -- may have improved with more Democrats elected to Congress.

"Is he prepared to deal with a Democratic majority that may push him farther than he wants to go -- that's his decision," said Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "To a remarkable degree, this election puts the ball in the president's court."

But the most significant will be how Bush handles the rapidly evolving politics surrounding the war in Iraq. With his comments today -- and the appointment as defense secretary of former CIA director Robert Gates, known as a member of the more pragmatic Republican school of foreign policy -- Bush seemed to signal a willingness to rethink key aspects of his Iraq strategy in light of the clear repudiation by a broad swath of the electorate. The White House has said it is awaiting advice from a bipartisan study group co-chaired by former Republican secretary of state James A. Baker III, and many in the foreign policy community expect the panel's report will present Bush a vehicle to try to gain more international support for trying to resolve the conflict there.

With control of at least one chamber of Congress -- and its powerful committee structure -- Democrats will for the first time be positioned to challenge Bush's conduct of the war while promoting their own idea of a phased withdrawal of 140,000 U.S. troops from Iraq. Bush also will likely face enormous pressure from major figures in his own party to trim his ambitions of establishing a stable, functioning democracy in the heart of the Middle East.

Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) , a leading Democratic critic of the war and a candidate to be the new House majority leader, told National Public Radio that the change of power in the House "is going to change politics" on the war. "You get the committee system working in a bipartisan manner -- and that's the only way this problem can be solved -- and then we confront the president on the issue," he said.

While the president may say "we're not going to change the policy," Murtha added, Democrats will begin holding the administration accountable for its decisions on Iraq.

Vin Weber, a lobbyist and former GOP lawmaker with close ties in the White House, said Iraq may have actually become more complicated for the Democrats with the election results. "The Democrats have had it easy so far -- they have just been able to criticize and identify with the voters' frustration," he said. "Now they are going to have to become partners in governing."

Ever since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Bush has governed largely from the right, challenging the Democrats to support his proposals on terrorism and other matters -- or risk retribution at the polls. Until yesterday, he has thrived politically, defying predictions that the GOP would lose seats in the 2002 midterms and securing his own reelection two years later by a tremendous drive to galvanize grassroots Republican voters.

The strategy came up short for the first time yesterday, as Democrats picked up more than two dozen House seats, gaining the majority for the first time in 12 years, and seemed close to securing control of the Senate. Voters seemed to ignore the president's explicit warning that they would risk the country's safety and economic prosperity by giving power to the Democrats.

Now Bush must govern without his base in the House, which has been the driving force for much of his agenda on Medicare, energy, terrorism and taxes: GOP leaders had muscled through one Bush proposal after another, often with only a handful of votes to spare.

As former Presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan demonstrated, split government can be an opportunity for a clever president: Clinton successfully used then-GOP speaker Newt Gingrich as a foil to present himself as a centrist, while he also secured a major overhaul of the welfare system and a balanced-budget agreement that was seen as keeping the economic prosperity of the 1990s going. Reagan achieved the last major overhaul of the tax code working with a Democratic House in 1986.

And while Democrats don't necessarily like to admit it, Bush does have a pre-9/11 track record -- both as Texas governor and in his first year as president -- of reaching across the aisle for agreements on education and taxes. He has spoken of his desire to launch a new bi-partisan effort to rein in the costs of Social Security and Medicare, and he has deputized his new Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., to sound out Hill Democrats about this possibility.

But as of this morning, it remained uncertain whether Bush would fully embrace this model -- and whether he could even be successful were he to try. White House aides have been privately frank in their frustration over what they see as relentless obstructionism by congressional Democrats, who in turn see the president as not sincere in his overtures.

The mid-term election campaigns may have only exacerbated this divide. In the last days of the campaign, Bush repeatedly cast sharp aspersions on the very proposition that the opposition can govern responsibly -- suggesting at one point that terrorists would "win" if Democratic policies were put in place -- and Democrats have used their own harsh rhetoric to characterize the president. Bush may ultimately decide that the best course would be to govern aggressively from the right, as some in his party advocate, accept that little would get done legislatively -- and set up contrasts for the party's presidential nominee to exploit in 2008.

Democrats will have their own internal debates to resolve. The party's liberal base is hungry to extract retribution from a president many believe has governed lawlessly and incompetently, yet the Democrats' electoral success yesterday hinged at least partly on the ability to make some inroads with more moderate, even conservative, candidates. Many Democratic lawmakers have signed on to a vague plan for a phased withdrawal from Iraq, but the party remains divided between a base eager to get out soon and a foreign policy establishment that sees a precipitous withdrawal as potentially damaging to both the country's and the party's interests.

One thing that seems certain is that the leadership of the Democratic Party sees value in trying to present a moderate image to voters, at least for now. In their comments last night and this morning, party leaders made clear that they have studied and learned from what they see as the bitter lessons that flowed from Republican over-reaching following the GOP's smashing victories in the 1994 mid-term elections.

Virtually every comment from party leaders suggested a belief that Americans are tired of partisan bickering. "We extend our hand of friendship, fellowship and partnership to the Republicans," Senate Democratic leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) told a victory rally last night. "The only way we can accomplish anything in the Congress is by working in a bipartisan basis."

Whether he and other leading Democrats truly believe in this approach after years of partisan warfare -- and whether President Bush grasps an extended hand -- will be the story of Washington for the next several months.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

This afternoon, Bush showed that he could turn on a dime if necessary: Bush ousted Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld only a week after telling reporters he would stay through the end of the administration. And he voiced great willingness to work with Democrats on Capitol Hill, following an election campaign in which he regularly impugned the opposition for policies he said could weaken America and lead to the victory of terrorists.

What do you mean "turn on a dime" - this looks like the stuff he used to call "flip-flop". Oh, but then, he's a changed man now (born yet again, I suppose) seeing that those he smeared for years now hold the wallet.

[cmartyn 0]

Waiting for the 7.25 / hr minimum wage trades.. Bush will want 6 gun toters on the supreme court for that and the dems will give it to them. Then the economy will falter as it probably is about to anyways and then we will all elect republicans again and ...

Doomed.

[I'm Gone 60]

This about the only major thing to get done now.

"tough enforcement coupled with some kind of pathway to citizenship for long-time illegal immigrants -- may have improved with more Democrats elected to Congress."

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

he is a nifty one.

Daniel

:energetic:

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Turn on a dime? Flip Flop?

I guess that's what happens when the public hands you a referendum on accountability.

[I'm Gone 60]

Bush says he can work with Democrats and Rumsfield takes a hike and you all act like he's now for gay marriage and higher taxes.

What is Bush going to say except that he can work with the Democrats. Now the Rumsfield thing I don't understand, because the damage has already been done, unless he wants to give the appearance that he's open to change, because I don't see anything changing in Iraq anytime soon. Plus now Democrats will have to come up with passable ideas, Before they could propose any stupid idea knowing it would never pass and then try to pin the blame on the Republicans for not passing their "great ideas".

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Bush says he can work with Democrats and Rumsfield takes a hike and you all act like he's now for gay marriage and higher taxes.

What is Bush going to say except that he can work with the Democrats. Now the Rumsfield thing I don't understand, because the damage has already been done, unless he wants to give the appearance that he's open to change, because I don't see anything changing in Iraq anytime soon. Plus now Democrats will have to come up with passable ideas, Before they could propose any stupid idea knowing it would never pass and then try to pin the blame on the Republicans for not passing their "great ideas".

He's reaping what he sows - as he should. Noone buys the Bush Administration 9/11 sympathy card anymore - I'm glad they got burned.

Whether this new lot will be any good is anyone's guess - but democratic change is mostly always positive.

[I'm Gone 60]

He's reaping what he sows - as he should.

Yeah Bush has single handedly destoyed 26 years of Republican gains.

[dalegg 143]

Are elections about Leadership or about Power?