Why Oh Why Are We Ruled by This Incompetent Clown?
Andrew Samwick on the Bush White House:
Vox Baby: Republicans and Gas Taxes: The word "emerging" is in quotes, referencing a theme of the article, which is that it is much easier for people who have worked inside a Presidential administration to advocate for politically unpopular ideas when they are on the outside. That's true but only to a point. It's not that Greg Mankiw ever said anything other than what he now says about the gas tax while on the inside. It's that the President sets the framework for all policy outcomes--not the CEA--even on economic issues. CEA, like every other part of the administration, works to generate the best outcomes within that framework. And if the President is not interested in a gas tax, then it becomes a very short conversation...
The most interesting thing about this, I think, is that it was the exact opposite in the Ford, George H.W. Bush, and Clinton administrations. If Advisor X thought that policy Y was a very good idea, and if the President was not interested, then Advisor X looked forward not to a very short but to a very long conversation.
You see, a President who trusts, values, and respects his advisors doesn't cut them off when they tell him that he is wrong not be interested in policy Y. He listens.
Elect Presidents like Ford, George H.W. Bush, and Clinton. Don't elect presidents like George W. Bush.
i've always said this is a ceo presidency: a '70s-style ceo presidency, that is.
Posted by: howard | October 09, 2006 at 09:21 AM
However...remember that Bush I ran the country by dividing us rather than uniting us. After all, what was the point of Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court?
Posted by: malcolm | October 09, 2006 at 10:17 AM
GHWB had 50+ years to observe his son. In spite of that, he encouraged the country to vote the guy into the presidency.
That makes him every bit as culpable as GWB in the current mess.
Posted by: Maynard Handley | October 09, 2006 at 10:47 AM
I think the difference is that Clinton trusted himself, because he was as smart as his advisers.
When Bush realized that the combination of his personal connections, Karl Rove, and the institutional power of the American Presidency had made him the most powerful man in the history of the world, he felt a sort of giddiness, but it was shadowed by the feeling that he might be in over his head.
Given his demonstrated lack of personal character and hands-on experience, I don't think that we can expect him to respond more sanely than Nixon did, when and if his world falls apart.
Posted by: John Emerson | October 09, 2006 at 11:14 AM
The delicious irony of George W. Bush's presidency is that he is a fuckup of the first order who set out to show the world (and his father) that he knew better than everyone else. Now he has proven to almost everyone's satisfaction that, yes, he *is* a fuckup of the first order.
Posted by: dubblblind | October 09, 2006 at 12:54 PM
Treating the President as a monarch and the government as his Court is a very, very bad idea.
We have a vast government, society and economy, and no individual President is going to be the least bit interested in even the majority of issues troubling the country. Nor are there enough hours in the day for a President to listen, literally, to everyone, who might like to have his attention.
Presidents should preside.
The deeper problem with Bush is not just that he's ideological, incurious and stupid. It is that he, and his Party, are deeply corrupt. Not really troubling to understand anything, and not caring, has freed their tiny minds to concentrate on delivering the dollars. The technocracy is in decline not just because Bush is an ignorant, lazy, stupid fool, but because, at the end of the day, he presides over a government where delivering profits to Halliburton is the dominant concern driving Iraq reconstruction policy.
Posted by: Bruce Wilder | October 09, 2006 at 12:59 PM
While there can be no doubt that Ford, George H.W. Bush, and Clinton would all be vastly better than the monster we have now, I certainly wouldn't hold them up as the kinds of President we "should" be electing. We can and should do much, much better.
Posted by: David J. Balan | October 09, 2006 at 03:37 PM
"Elect Presidents like Ford, George H.W. Bush, and Clinton. Don't elect presidents like George W. Bush."
Hmmm. I note with some satisfaction that you don't include Reagan in the first sentence. Good. But I doubt Ford should be included also. I'm sure that somebody in the white house must have mentioned that pardoning Nixon would be a really really bad idea that would set awful precendents, but either Ford didn't listen or the anti-pardon elements didn't make their case strongly enough.
Also, George H.W. Bush didn't listen to Colin Powell when the latter suggested that continued economic and political sanctions were a better alternative than launching Gulf War I.
Posted by: andres | October 09, 2006 at 03:42 PM
"GHWB had 50+ years to observe his son. In spite of that, he encouraged the country to vote the guy into the presidency.
That makes him every bit as culpable as GWB in the current mess."
Hallejujiah, yes!! Comes time to evaluate, do not forget this.
Posted by: prostratedragon | October 10, 2006 at 12:20 AM
What andres Said about Ford and being elected, though I'll dissent and note that one of the reasons I respect the Ford Administration is because Ford made the right decision, probably even knowing the consequences. (He retrospectively turned out to be correct with "The Poles are an independent and autonomous people" as well.)
Posted by: Ken Houghton | October 10, 2006 at 09:49 AM