What a difference a year makes

[Horse with no Name]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1602420,00.html

>>>>>>>>.snip
The decision of Harriet Miers to withdraw her name from consideration for the US supreme court is an indication of how weakened and beleaguered the Bush administration has become. A year ago, though no resolution to the war in Iraq was in sight, the administration was in a commanding position in American politics. Literally so, in that it virtually dictated the terms in which every topic, whether domestic or foreign, could be discussed, imposing narrow limits on debate which affected not only its own supporters but the media, the universities and the opposition party.
>>>>>>>snip

George Bush
What a difference a year makes

Leader
Friday October 28, 2005
The Guardian

The decision of Harriet Miers to withdraw her name from consideration for the US supreme court is an indication of how weakened and beleaguered the Bush administration has become. A year ago, though no resolution to the war in Iraq was in sight, the administration was in a commanding position in American politics. Literally so, in that it virtually dictated the terms in which every topic, whether domestic or foreign, could be discussed, imposing narrow limits on debate which affected not only its own supporters but the media, the universities and the opposition party.
But, as casualties mounted in Iraq, as the contradictions inherent in President Bush's economic and social policies became evident, and as the president blundered in his reaction to events, and in particular to the hurricane which devastated New Orleans, the administration's grip has slackened more and more. The Bush administration's ineptness was never more evident than when the president named his family lawyer as his choice to be associate justice of the supreme court. The choice attracted all-azimuth derision, from lawyers who saw Ms Miers as a candidate who was plainly unqualified for the job to bipartisan critics who deplored another presidential selection from the ranks of former associates and friends, coming so soon after Mr Bush's man at the federal emergency management agency, also allegedly a "crony" appointment, failed to meet the challenge presented by Hurricane Katrina. Above all it rankled with Bush's own Christian conservative constituency, because there were question marks over Ms Miers's position on issues dear to them, and it was even speculated that she might have secret liberal leanings.
>>>>>>>>>>>snip
The Miers candidacy was almost instantly seen as one of a bundle of investigations, inquiries, and hearings proceeding simultaneously which all augured ill for the administration. They include the investigations into house majority leader Tom DeLay's campaign practices, inquiries into alleged corruption touching other Republican politicians or their associates, and the special prosecutor's investigation into the leaking of the name of a covert CIA agent, which is due to conclude today. Presidents have lost their candidates for supreme court jobs in the past, but not often, and usually because the party in opposition has been able to tip the balance against the presidential choice. The Miers choice was in effect rejected by Republicans, and the outcome raises the question of whether the uneasy Republican coalition, between the remains of the moderate conservative wing now represented by people like Senator John McCain, the more or less secular hard right represented by men like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, and the Christian right who are so strong in parts of the country, can long survive. In opposing Ms Miers the latter group took no account of the difficulties afflicting the Bush presidency, or of how yet another setback would interact with those he has already suffered and may suffer in the near future.