Going Out With A Bang

Lame duck periods have historically been very quiet. Eisenhower’s negotiations with the Soviet Union were derailed by the U2 incident, and while he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1960 he didn’t champion it. Johnson was too unpopular to get anything big done by the time he term-limited himself. Reagan limped to the finish in the wake of Iran-Contra and Clinton in the wake of impeachment. Probably all shared some feeling of simple courtesy toward their successors as well - don’t dump some big new program or policy on the President-elect. Clear the decks as much as possible; leave the next one a clean slate. Our current President is having none of that.

The most recent sign came with Leila Fadel’s McClatchy report on Monday that begins “Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases as part of a proposed ’status of forces’ agreement [SOFA] that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely.” I have written previously about how Congress could lead on this. It is the branch that ratifies treaties and it is clear that a SOFA is very limited. Establishing a long term military presence that nearly doubles our current number of bases and essentially formalizes our role as an occupying power stretches its intent past the breaking point. It puts us into “looks like a duck” territory.

Another issue that refuses to go away is FISA reform. From the debate over the Protect America Act, to its passage, the excitement over its expiration and the attempt to get some kind of permanent version passed there has been a remarkable amount of lying, deception, and what can only be charitably called sloppy reporting. Of the last, the most recent came from Eric Lichtblau this week - and was quickly, comprehensively and hilariously taken apart by Glenn Greenwald. By all indications the finished product would be a major piece of legislation. The biggest sticking point has been retroactive immunity for the telecom industry. Right now lawsuits over their cooperation with government surveillance are in process, and potentially the most explosive part will not be verdicts or even testimony but discovery. At that point we will start to see just how indiscriminate and invasive the spying has been, and the public will likely be furious. Shutting them down now is a major decision and deserves a public discussion. Other aspects of FISA reform are extremely important as well. At this late date the President should not push for something to get hustled through. We are on America’s clock now, not his.

Then there is Iran. James Fallows has some history of the saber rattling along with some recent rumors. For one example, last year then-CENTCOM commander William Fallon reportedly said an attack “will not happen on my watch…There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box.” (That kind of outlook in the current administration is a good way to give your job title a “then-” prefix.) Still, Fallows’ new warning is important. There have been rumblings of a surgical strike and a limited campaign, but if we have learned anything in Iraq it is that the law of unintended consequences can easily turn quick strikes into massive blowback. (This is the charitable explanation - less charitably, the consequences were intended all along, or consequences of either type were never considered.) If it is a bad idea to change horses midstream then isn’t it even worse to enter the stream knowing you will have to change?

Here is an early test of Barack Obama. John McCain is on board with all the major current policies so there is no reason to expect he would object. But if Obama objects he has options. He could announce on the campaign trail that effective immediately he will repudiate any SOFA negotiated by the President unless he first gives it his blessing. (The “politics stops at the waters edge” policy was suspended on May 15th, and don’t fool yourself - he was referring to Obama (via) until the criticism started.) Obama could take to the floor and lead a filibuster of any radical FISA overhaul. He could forcefully come out against strikes against Iran and promise impeachment hearings for any military action not authorized by Congress. He could short-circuit just about any grand design at this point; if push comes to shove will he?

There are already comparisons made between the high crimes and misdemeanors that got Bill Clinton impeached and the ones that will likely go unpunished with his successor. If the trend is that the former did something bad and the latter did something catastrophic then consider: The final act Bill Clinton is most remembered for as President is his pardon of Mark Rich.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Not So Fast

George H W Bush dumped Somalia on Bill Clinton in December 1992.

Point taken

But I don’t think Somalia was a major foreign policy initiative. It wasn’t like we had thousands of soldiers there. It ended up as a big black eye for Clinton though, so as I said point taken.

Why would Obama object

To a locked-in SOFA?

Any Democrat who ends the war will have to contend with 20 years of wingnuts whining about how the Democrats “wouldn’t let us win” in Iraq.

This way, he can do nothing about stopping the war, and if the voters complain that they voted to end it, he can just say that the SOFA won’t permit it.

If I were Obama and

If I were Obama and president, I would activate the draft immediately. I would say that I couldn’t in good conscience continue to stop loss soldiers and send them on two, three and more tours of Iraq and Afghanistan. That it was necessary even to get American troops out in a reasonable time and with reasonable safety.

Let the Republicans scream. Let them try to continue pushing for the war with the deterioration of the armed forces it is causing. I think he would find suddenly a lot more support for getting out of Iraq.

He would take a lot of heat, but the end of the war would, I bet, become bi partisan.

President Laughingstock

Bush’s break with reality has reached the point where people are beginning to openly talk about it as a serious problem rather than just shrug him off, as has been the case internationally for a couple of years now. On his current Farewell Tour of Europe, with no successes to celebrate and no previously negotiated triumphs to sign, Bush has been giving speech after speech in a positive, we’ll-git-’er-done style. No one is having it, and in some venues the usual polite applause has been almost drown out by the background buzz of WTF?

In Iraq, the Iraqis are standing up; IIRC, that means we can start standing down. Al-Maliki is saying that there will be no new SOFA agreement, and even an extension of the UN mandate is in question. Without either a new mandate or a SOFA or a treaty, all foreign troops will have to leave. As danps points out, however, getting crossways with BushCo is a risky business; come October, Nouri al-Maliki may another person referred to in the past tense.

BushCo will push as hard as they can to get as much as they can while the getting is good, criminals always do, but sweeping new domestic programs or major foreign policy breakthroughs are increasingly unlikely. Here at home there is steadily less and less reason for even his own party to go along with him; internationally, he is already yesterday’s news.

Not being Pollyanna here and danps is right to raise the alarm. BushCo’s choices are becoming very limited; either a huge, dramatic gesture like an attack on Iran - or settle for nothing at all.

Somewhere in the White House, the increasingly delusional George Bush is staring into a mirror and talking to himself:

“You’ve got to ask yourself one question: ’Do I feel lucky?’
Well, do ya punk?”

What you said, danps

Je repete:

Here is an early test of Barack Obama. John McCain is on board with all the major current policies so there is no reason to expect he would object. But if Obama objects he has options. He could announce on the campaign trail that effective immediately he will repudiate any SOFA negotiated by the President unless he first gives it his blessing. (The “politics stops at the waters edge” policy was suspended on May 15th, and don’t fool yourself - he was referring to Obama (via) until the criticism started.) Obama could take to the floor and lead a filibuster of any radical FISA overhaul. He could forcefully come out against strikes against Iran and promise impeachment hearings for any military action not authorized by Congress. He could short-circuit just about any grand design at this point; if push comes to shove will he?

Any of these actions would considerably reduce the “unknown unknowns” from Obama, and might warm up those whose support for him is currently tepid.

[x] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.