The Inaugural:
President George W. Bush's speech promoting a policy of fighting global tyranny was simultaneously striking and soporific. 1) Much has been made of the fact that Bush did not mention the word "Iraq" in his speech. But far, far more significant is the fact that Iraq dominated the entire speech. 2) The speech was so poorly written that where it did touch on policy, it seemed to announce a major policy change by accident. Bush appeared to be signaling a switch from a mild interventionist foreign policy against potential terrorist havens to a full-blown Wilsonian quest to abolish "tyranny" from the earth and establish universal democracy. Bush's press staff had to work overtime correcting this misperception, even bringing in Bush's father, former President George Bush, to clarify that no policy change was intended. The Left:
Democrats' activity during Bush's inaugural week, and their response to his inaugural address, confirm the political opposition's continued willingness to resist all of Bush's policies at any cost. 1) House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) and national party Chairman Terry McAuliffe spent the week-normally a time of bipartisanship-making aggressively partisan statements to the effect that Bush's policies are going nowhere in the 109th Congress. 2) Speaking on television, Pelosi gave six specific points on which Democrats will resist Bush: Social Security reform, jobs, health care, education, the environment, and "strong national defense." This list includes every major issue in Washington except one: the judiciary. 3) That latter issue will come to a head in the U.S. Senate, where Democrats have vowed to continue filibusters against judges they view as too conservative. As a result, there will probably be no common ground from which to work in the new Congress. The Right:
Conservatives, meanwhile, found little reason for comfort in Bush's address. They worry their priorities are being ignored in favor of the Iraq war. Meanwhile, they see signs of Bush's abandoning the principles on which he was elected, now that he is a lame-duck President. 1) In pre-inaugural comments, Bush sounded a defeatist note on prospects for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. 2) Bush's second-term nominations fit a general pattern of officials who are comfortable personally with Bush, but do not necessarily follow an ideological course. This is in sharp contrast to the first round of nominations, which contained names provoking outrage on the left: John Ashcroft, Ted Olson, Gale Norton, Linda Chavez (whose nomination was withdrawn). Also in that mix was conservative Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton. This second round is far less combative. 3 ) The State Department will probably be dominated by careerists under Condoleezza Rice more than it was under Colin Powell. For example, Nick Burns, a Foreign Service officer named to the department's third-ranking post as undersecretary for political affairs, is close to the John Kerry foreign policy team and probably would have had the same position if Bush had lost. There is no Bolton-like conservative stalwart in this round of appointments. 4) To the outrage of many on the Right, the new co-chairman of the Republican National Committee, Jo Ann Davidson, is a founding member of the abortion-rights group Republicans for Choice. Davidson had been extremely helpful to Bush's campaign in Ohio when Gov. Bob Taft (R.) did almost nothing. She also made a promise not to publicly oppose Bush, and not to address abortion-rights groups while serving in the RNC position. Yet pro-life groups still fear what her appointment portends.
