The Cost of the "New Tone"

May 26, 2002

by Christopher G. Adamo

During the final days of the Clinton impeachment trial in the United States Senate, far sighted Democrats concocted an ingenious strategy which could conceivably give them political cover while vilifying those Republicans who sought to bring the President to justice. The cagey Democrats, who had unquestionably supported and protected every bit of corruption in the Clinton White House, suddenly endorsed the concept of a "censure" for the President, in lieu of actual conviction and removal from office. Had censure been invoked, Democrats could not only have claimed that they had reacted with proper moral indignation to Clinton’s multiple transgressions, they would also have been able to assert that their reaction was "appropriate" for the President’s conduct, as opposed to the "excessiveness" being exhibited by the Republicans.

For their plan to work, Democrats initially needed cooperation from gullible, pragmatic, and otherwise spineless members of the Republican Senate majority. Fortunately, this turned out to be one of the rare instances in which Republican principle and resolve remained sufficiently intact to prevent them from buying into such a ruse. Senator Phil Gramm (R., Texas) quickly issued statements to the effect that a censure was not an option to be considered.

Unfortunately, the larger lesson has not been sufficiently comprehended, either by Republican Senate and House leaders, or by President Bush. Liberals in general, and Democrats in particular, embrace an agenda which they hope to impose on America. However, they know that when their intentions are properly exposed to the American people, backlash and outrage are inevitable. Therefore, in order to create political cover, Democratic leaders invariably seek to garner "bipartisan support" in an effort to mollify critics by the suggestion that both parties in Washington are unanimous in their advocacy of the agenda. More often than not, enough Republican "moderates" jump on to the bandwagon to strengthen the credibility of the facade.

For his part, President Bush has fallen into the bipartisanship “snare” with discouraging regularity. His recent acceptance of campaign finance "reform," as well as other foundational precepts of the liberal agenda, have damaged his standing among many in the Conservative "base" who were once his most enthusiastic advocates. But it was his "new tone" in Washington, by which he meant his intention to rise above all of the negative rancor of the past eight years, which perhaps holds the greatest potential to harm his presidency and the country as a whole. This past week’s upheaval over the suggestion of prior knowledge to 9-11 is but a tiny sample of possible future scandal and conflict.

In a futile attempt to prove his "nice guy" credentials to his political opposition, George W. Bush chose not to replace several Clinton appointees in key positions. What the president either didn’t understand, or thought he could "gloss over" with his wit and charm, is that the malfeasance and incompetence of these people will ever-after reflect not just on Bill Clinton, but also on George W. Bush. IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossetti, to name one, established a reputation as a hired gun for the former President by systematically auditing his political enemies, while simultaneously turning a blind eye to blatant violations of tax code from those on the left. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, who has the ultimate "say so" in regards to airport security, chooses instead to use his authority to lament his mistreatment as a Japanese-American during the Second World War. Thus Americans are put at greater risk of another airline-related attack.

It was however, the President’s retention of CIA director George Tenet, along with his unwillingness to expediently replace FBI director Louis Freeh, which may prove to be the most ominous specter of the Clinton years now coming back to haunt the Bush administration. Information is now surfacing within these two agencies which conclusively proves that government intelligence had significant knowledge that Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist organization were orchestrating attacks against the United States.

Had the Bush administration replaced Freeh and Tenet in an expedient manner, and more importantly, had the Bush administration diligently pursued the investigation of these two individuals for their inept dealings with previous terrorist plots, the impending threat of 9-11 may well have become apparent. Of course such a pursuit would not have been considered "bipartisan" nor conducive to the congenial atmosphere President Bush was attempting to establish in the nation’s capital.

By embracing incompetent and unethical holdovers from the Clinton administration, George W. Bush unwittingly embraces their questionable character and incompetence as well. And despite his efforts, those Democrats whom he has attempted to mollify with his "new tone" will assuredly be among the first to attack him over any problems which arise on his watch.

Though Democratic antagonists are seeking to magnify this situation to their greatest possible advantage by posing that famously predictable question "What did the president know and when did he know it?" - their transparent ploy does not appear to be working. However, sufficient reasons exist to justify an immediate and thorough “house cleaning” in order to preclude the possibility of further surprises. An unwillingness to do so will likely reflect negatively on the entire Bush administration.

For on the day that any future attack occurs, people may well begin asking "What should the president have known, and when should he have known it?"

_________________________________________

Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer who lives in southeastern Wyoming with his wife and sons. He has been involved in grassroots political activity for many years. Chris was the editor of the Wyoming Christian from 1994 to 1996, and his columns can also been seen at CheyenneNetwork.com.

Send the author an E mail at Adamo@ConservativeTruth.org.

For more of Christopher's articles, visit his archives.