Krugman hits the ball out of the ball park this morning

[Michael Eisenstadt]

Going for Broke
By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: January 20, 2004
 
According to advance reports, George Bush will use tonight's State of
the Union speech to portray himself as a visionary leader who stands
above the political fray. But that act is losing its effectiveness. Mr.
Bush's relentless partisanship has depleted much of the immense good
will he enjoyed after 9/11. He is still adored by his base, but he is
deeply distrusted by much of the nation.

Mr. Bush may not understand this; indeed, he still seems to think that
he's another Lincoln or F.D.R. "No president has done more for human
rights than I have," he told Ken Auletta.

But his political handlers seem to have decided on a go-for-broke
strategy: confuse the middle one last time, energize the base and grab
enough power that the consequences don't matter. 

What do I mean by confusing the middle? The striking thing about the
"visionary" proposals floated in advance of the State of the Union is
their transparent cynicism and lack of realism. Mr. Bush has, of course,
literally promised us the Moon — and Mars, too. And the ever-deferential
media have managed to keep a straight face.

But that's just the most dramatic example of an array of policy
proposals that don't withstand even minimal scrutiny. Mr. Bush has
already pushed through an expensive new Medicare benefit — without any
visible source of financing. Reports say that tonight he'll propose
additional, and even more expensive, new initiatives, like partial
Social Security privatization — which all by itself would require at
least $1 trillion in extra funds over the next decade. Where is all this
money going to come from? 

Judging from the latest CBS/New York Times Poll, these promises of
something for nothing aren't likely to convince many people. It's not
just that the bounce from Saddam's capture has already gone away.
Unfavorable views of Mr. Bush as a person have reached record levels for
his presidency. It seems fair to say that many Americans, like most of
the rest of the world, simply don't trust him anymore. 

But some Americans will respond to upbeat messages, no matter how
unrealistic. And that may be enough for Mr. Bush, because while he poses
as someone above the fray, he is continuing to solidify his base.

The most sinister example was the recess appointment of Charles
Pickering Sr., with his segregationist past and questionable record on
voting rights, to the federal appeals court — the day after Martin
Luther King's actual birthday. Was this careless timing? Don't be silly:
it was a deliberate, if subtle, gesture of sympathy with a part of the
Republican coalition that never gets mentioned in public.

A less objectionable but equally calculated gesture will be Mr. Bush's
demand that his tax cuts be made permanent. Realistically, this can't
make any difference to the economy now, and it makes no sense, given the
array of new spending plans he will simultaneously unveil. But it's a
signal to the base that any seeming moderation needn't be taken
seriously, and that the administration's hard-right turn will continue. 

Meanwhile, the lying has already begun, with the Republican National
Committee's willful misrepresentation of Wesley Clark's prewar
statements. (Why are news organizations letting them get away with
this?)

The question we should ask is, Where is all this leading?

Some cynical pundits think that Mr. Bush's advisers plan to leave the
hard work of dealing with the mess he's made to future presidents. But I
don't think that's right. I can't see how the budget can continue along
its current path through a second Bush term — financial markets won't
stand for it.

And what about the growing military crisis? The mess in Iraq has placed
our volunteer military, a magnificent but fragile institution, under
immense strain. National Guard and Reserve members find themselves
effectively drafted as full-time soldiers. More than 40,000 soldiers
whose enlistment terms have expired have been kept from leaving under
"stop loss" orders. This can't go on for four more years.

Karl Rove and other insiders must know all this. So they must figure
that once they have won the election, they will have such a complete
lock on power that they can break many of their promises with impunity.

What will they do with that lock on power? Their election strategy —
confuse the middle, but feed the base — suggests the answer.