1 Mostwarshaveat leastlimitedrules,suchasthe1949 GenevaConvention(III)relativetothe TreatmentofPrisonersWar. responsibility fortheviewsexpressed hereisentirelymine. Among others, Charles Goodsell, Tom Halper, Charles Hartwig, Anne Lofgren, and anonymous reviewers commented on various drafts of this manuscript, but PoliticalScienceDepartment.Texas A&MUniversity-Kingsville. * VisitingFellow,SchoolofSocialSciences. AustralianNationalUniversity.January-July2008. is aproblemonlyifyougetcaught. rules the breaking commentators, sports and players coaches, long as you follow one sacred rule: ‘Win at any cost’”. For many professional football on Fox Sports Net said: “Anything goes for as advertisement an 2005, of fall the In thing.” only the it’s Bay Packers, is known for his statement: “Winning isn’t everything; Green the of coach head former Lombardi, Vince gone. long are days Those game”. the play you how it’s lose, or win you whether not “It’s said: sometimes was it age, gentler a In las Unidos. distorsiona Estados los para frecuentemente Unidos plazo que largo y todo”, Estados es los a poder lo el mediano gradual a “ganar colocado tuvieron ha ende, fortalecer todo” y desastrosos es por lo y, presuposición cual la país “ganar lo su legislativo en de y Bush, interna, potencialmente W. fuera y resumir ejecutivo política George dentro podría la problemas clave: se en poderes que creado presidente los hegemonía ha Palabras del la exterior Paralelamente, figura “árbitros”, política la directamente la alcanzaron Iraq. de los de a en controlar ignora alrededor e republicana pantanosa semiidealista inicios- reglas mayoría congregó la sus y se enfoque situación en Un Bush una en reglas. las jurídico. el estadounidense semilegítima y sobre ignorar nación la -débil para 2001, influencia de su mente administración su septiembre a de 11 Bush del permitió W. eventos George los de Tras presidencia la todo: es lo Ganar Key Words: the “referees”(theGAO,CBO,IMF),hascreatedpotentiallydisastrousmediumandlong-termproblemsforUnitedStates. unempirical “winning is everything” approach to domestic policy, which often distorts the rules (law, science, and standard economics) and ignores they often proceeded to do so. A semi-idealistic “winning is everything” approach to foreign policy led the United States into a quagmire in Iraq. An and the Republican majority in Congress attained hegemony domestically as well as internationally. Having acquired the power to ignore the rules, Bush judiciary. the over influence its strengthen gradually and government of branches legislative and executive the control directly to came mate semi-legiti and weak initially was that administration An Bush. W. George President around rallied States United the 9/11/01, of events the After Richard E.Hartwig* Winning isEverything:ThePresidencyofGeorgeW.Bush CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 GeorgeW.Bush,U.S.foreignpolicy,domesticpolitics,internationalrules. George W. Bush. política exterior estadounidense, política interna estadounidense. interna política estadounidense, exterior política Bush. W. George I. INTRODUCTION Fecha derecepción:06/08/07aceptación:13/11/07
ISSN: 1870-3569 [email protected] erees. Winning without rules and referees is war. is referees and rules without Winning erees. ref and rules both have games Football well. as fans posing op the between but players, the between only not war, a into turn would game The referees. without game football sional profes or college important an play to be would philosophy text of a winning-is-everything culture. The coaches and play con the in particularly impossible, be would referees without rules the Applying meaningless. be would rules without losing of its freedom. Americans as I knew them in the twenties had not yet yet not had twenties the in limitations them mortal knew wire and I the as inflexible against never the not wings Americans had its did It It break discovered freedom. aviary. yet and its not of head carefree. had its and and imperceptible smash to netting happy, immense, enough an in far omnipotent, flown enclosed felt was it eagle know American The One way of testing Lombardi������������������������������ testing of way One Richard E.Hartwig [email protected]. been really tested by spiteful and sardonic history. history. sardonic and spiteful by tested really been ’s “winning is the only thing” only the is “winning ’s
Luigi Barzini(1977) 1 Winning or Winning ------87
Ensayos CONfines 88 Ensayos CONfines ucsfl lrey eas “inn” a a appropriate an was “winning” because largely successful, was 9/11/01 of events the to response immediate the policy, in described foreign In failure. long-term and success be short-term of terms may presidency on) now from (Bush, Bush distort realityforleadersandfollowersalike. to known is nationalism and level, societal a on nationalism to comparable seems which process bonding psychological a of screaming “kill the ref!”. True-believer football fans undergo point the to sometimes differently, it interpret and play same the see can residence of place is difference only whose teams differ ently. Concisely, allegiances referees mold perceptions. Fans of of football decisions the see to tend also game a of sides opposing on fans The see. to want they what see often ers have vested interests in interpreting the rules their way and the European Coal and Steel Community (which eventually be Nations (UN), the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, United the Charter, Atlantic the to lead (WWII) II War World of carnage incredible more even The treaty. Nations of League the ratify to refused Senate U.S. the because part in however, failed, organizations affiliated its and League The war. to end an put help to created were Justice International of Court nent Perma the and Organization, Labor International the Nations, of League The sphere. international the in referees and rules incredible carnage of World War I starkly illustrated the need for The be. to used there than more many are there and politics, international in referees and rules are there obviously, Less players. football the like are forces military the game; football a in fans the like are countries different of Citizens respects: several in football American to similar is politics International “rules” and“referees” of expense the at “winning” on over-emphasis an in found be failures—especially with respect to Iraq and fiscal matters—may long-term of origins the that argue will paper this metaphor, football the Using best. at questionable, are policies domestic and foreign key Bush’s of outcomes longer-term The election. presidential 2004 the and elections mid-term 2002 the won and policies, reduction tax his implemented Administration, Security Homeland the created attacks, 9/11/01 the of wake the in nation the rallied successfully Bush politics, domestic In Iraq. in Hussein Saddam overthrew and Afghanistan in Taliban the defeated quickly States United The objective. short-term 2 Theterms“rules”and“referees”are usedbroadlyhere.Takingaccountofscientificevidenceisconsideredto beaformofrule-following. Winning isEverything:ThePresidencyofGeorgeW.Bush h ky oeg ad oetc oiis f h Gog W. George the of policies domestic and foreign key The II. WINNINGININTERNATIONALPOLITICS 2 . - - - n nentoa pltc dfeety Nr hud t be surpris it should Nor differently. politics international in issues perceive will religions and institutions, languages, ries, histo cultures, interests, divergent with countries of citizens that surprising be not should it game, football a in differently environment followed. agreements and treaties relating to the protection of the global be internationally protected through the rule of law. Arms control should rights human that assumed became it Genocide, of Punishment and Prevention the on Convention the as such General Assembly and subsequent legally binding instruments, UN the by Rights Human of Declaration Universal the of tion adop 1948 the With states. between relationships the only (Sands, 2005: 10). International law had previously “regulated” States United the from leadership crucial with created”, been “a totally new system of international law and organizations had WWII, of end the of decade a Within (OECD). Development and organizations, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Trade, the World Trade Organization, a long list of regional Tariffs on Agreement General the Union), European the came In military terms, this country is the “big kid on the block” in block” the on kid “big the is country this terms, military In ends up failing in the long run. The case of Israel is illustrative: the block”. Even then, it often works only for a limited time and politics, which ignores the rules, works only for the “big kid on the importanceof“rulesgame.” understand help can nations between advantage for jockeying sport and competitive between comparison the differences, these Despite simultaneously. “games” multiple plays country each Finally, cases. many in rules the enforce to able referees the are Nor impartial. strictly are “referees” the nor rules the competition does not occur economic on a level playing field, and and neither political International competition. and economic political of outcome the in stake symbolic a than more have countries different from “fans” The killed. often are they every year and the players are not merely injured, as in football; zero from start not does score The game. a not is arena tional may losetrackofobjectivereality. and score, keep cannot we referees neutral Without disaster. humanitarian and chaos, war, is there rules, effective Without rules. of framework a within cooperation) (and competition with do to have economics and politics international football, Like important. extraordinarily are referees and rules that ing If virtually identical groups of Texans can see penalty calls penalty see can Texans of groups identical virtually If “inn i te ny hn” prah o international to approach thing” only the is “winning A The analogy is obviously not perfect. Politics in the interna CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 - - - - 3 SeeCrile(2003). to trying were Soviets the that believed They Union. Soviet the had undermined experts intelligence outside of order, team a and Cheney, short Rumsfeld, In mate. running Presidential Vice 1976 his as Rockefeller Nelson replaced and CIA the of head on) now from Senior, Bush (George Bush W. H. George made Ford Staff. of Chief House White as Rumsfeld succeeded Cheney Dick fense. De of Secretary as Rumsfeld Donald installed Ford President 1975 of fall the in However, 1972. in Soviets the with I) (SALT Treaty Limitation Arms Strategic a negotiated thus He race. Kissinger believed in draw. a with live could he weapons; nuclear of thousands with tics. He did not try to win poli international to approach terror) of balance (or power of virtues (Couloumbis & Wolfe, 1990: 7). legalistic righteousness.” Prudence and pragmatism are realist or moralistic ideological, of defense in or growth, limitless of pursuit the in survival collectivity’s the risks “never realist The politics as a struggle for personal, group and see national interests. Kennan George and Morgenthau Hans Carr, E.H. as such Ford, was a realist. Henry Kissinger, Secretary of State under Presidents Nixon and actually losing. terrorists ��������������������������� killing by Israel and Jews “win”����������������� sides both which in situation, current for the failure of the peace talks, this much seems certain. The blame the places one Wherever upon. agreed been had state Palestinian incipient the and Israel between relationship the governing rules if better infinitely been have would It wrong. were administration Clinton the during Palestinians the and se who opposed the peace settlement brokered between Israel objectivity impossible. However, it seems clear to me that tho nians has an emotional charge of several million volts, making nocent Israeli. The relationship between Israel and the Palesti isnosuchthing them,there asanin whatsoever.For conflict and other radical Palestinian groups recognize no rules for the for its citizens. One (but only one) reason for this is that Hamas won every battle, it has lost the war to secure peace and safety Ministers (Ostrovsky & Hoy, 1991: 24-26). Although Israel has Prime Israeli by terrorists considered are who Palestinians ting assassina by and River Jordan the of Bank West the on ments (international law) and the referees (the UN) by building settle Israe����������������������� time, long a For East. Middle the CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 III. WINNING IN U.S. FOREIGN POLICY détente détente
In International Relations literature, realists détente as the preferred approach to deal with vis-à-vis vis-à-vis , in setting rules to limit the arms —�������������������������� the Soviet Union, a country has resulted in both sides both in resulted has ����������������������� Kissinger had a balance l has ignored the rules the ignored has l —���������������� Hamas by killing by Hamas ------Aronoff (2006: 425-450) argues that National Security Advi Security National that argues 425-450) (2006: Aronoff Yael Afghanistan. of invasion Soviet 1979 the after foundered Union Soviet the with treaty II SALT a ratify and negotiate to attempts Carter’s Palestinians. the and Israel between accords David Camp the negotiated He grounds. ethical on CIA the by undertaken operations covert of number the reduced Carter relations. international in Rule Golden the by play and keeper brother’s his be to wanted He policy. foreign in rights human of importance the emphasized Carter century, twentieth the of President U.S. religious most the Perhaps 8). 1990: Wolfe, & (Couloumbis good” is what does she or he rather, possible; is what do not “does politician good a Russell, Bertrand and alists.” For idealists such as Mahatma Gandhi, Woodrow Wilson “pacifists, world federalists, humanitarians, legalists, and mor umphant. Goodhadtriumphedoverevil. tri were ideals democratic His won! had idealist, the Reagan, Empire”. “Evil the Union, Soviet the of disintegration the was important most And 1990. in electorally defeated finally were CIA. the by supplied massively Afghanistan, in rebels Mujahadin the by defeated were Soviets The for. wished have could Reagan that all was outcome The case. either in consideration significant a not was rules the by Playing Afghanistan. of government Soviet-controlled the on and Nicaragua of government Marxist the on war proxy covert made administration His verify.” but “trust stated Reagan trol, buildup directed at the Soviet Union. With respect to arms con military massive a in engaged administration Reagan the end, this To means. realistic by achieved be could goal An idealistic defeated. be could it that and evil was communism that believed Reagan optimist, incorrigible An idealist. and realist ticularly religious man, was a curious mixture of foreign policy the courseofIranianRevolution. in prisoner taken diplomats U.S. the rescue to mission Forces Special the of failure the by and crisis hostage ongoing the by politically undone was Carter Iran. in Revolution 1979 the by of Afghanistan. The Carter administration was also confronted takeover Soviet the of wake the in policy foreign to approach realistic more a to Carter converted Brzezinski Zbigniew sor idealist. not limit,thearmsrace(Mann,2004:56-78). win, to needed States United the logic, this under own; its of buildup military a needed States United the that inferred they Therefore, States. United the over superiority military attain im Cre bgn i peiec (9618) s an as (1976-1980) presidency his began Carter Jimmy rsdn Rnl Raa (908) tog nt par a not though (1980-88), Reagan Ronald President Richard E.Hartwig
The idealist school of International Relations includes Relations International of school idealist The 3 h Ncrga Sandinistas Nicaraguan The - - - - - 89
Ensayos CONfines 90 Ensayos CONfines (2003) writesthat: Kagan Robert economically. and militarily both superpower, only world’s the became States United the Union, Soviet the of fall the After 1990s. the during geopolitically changed world the But Court. Criminal International the create would which Treaty, Rome the and environment the on Protocol Kyoto the trol agreements and signed (but did not submit for ratification) cessor had negotiated. His administration advanced arms con North American Free Trade Agreement ( the of ratification congressional the secured and globalization economic supported Clinton (p.12). law” of rule the on based order world a building of approach [idealist] Wilsonian tional tradi the of continuation a represented ways most in dency and resistedthetemptationto“runupscore.” followed the rules of war, paid attention to the referee (the UN) Iraq was not one of them. In football terms, George Bush Senior invade to failing intact, relatively escape to Guard Republican such as ending the war a day or two too soon and allowing the war, Iraq the in made Senior Bush George mistakes Whatever troops. U.S. for strategy exit no was there Finally, region. the and country the in forces unpredictable unleash would dam Sad of fall the today, obvious is As Russia. with relationship U.S. the damaged also have would and of coalition U.S.-led members the Arab the by betrayal a as perceived been have would point that at Iraq invaded have To War. Cold the of end the after potential full its reaching be to seemed it when just organization that to damage great done have would and date man UN his exceeded have would so done have To Iraq. in regime Hussein’s Saddam remove to temptation the resisted a large international coalition of forces to do so. Afterwards, he UN authorization to use force to liberate Kuwait and in creating obtaining in successful was Senior Bush George 1991, in War, destroy” (quoted in Daalder & Lindsay, 2003: 4). to monsters of search in abroad, not goes she but pendence, inde and liberty for fight who those applauds “America that Scowcroft and Lawrence Eagleburger, and National Security Advisor Brent composed primarily of realists. Secretaries of State James Baker was team policy foreign His again. back swung pendulum the mine thelegalityof theirdetention(Sands,2005). 6 The U.S. Supreme Court decided in Rasul v. Bush, on June 28, 2004, that prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba do have access to U.S. federal courts to deter 5 SeeMann(2004),DaalderandLindsay (2003),and“FromBadtoWorse:America’sNuclearDealwithIndia”(2006) publishedin lenge–thereby makingthedestabilizing armsracesofothereraspointless,andlimitingrivalriestotrade pursuitsofpeace”(p.178). 4 In his Graduation Speech at West Point, June 1, 2002, Bush (quoted in Singer, 2004) said: “America has, and intends to keep, military strengths beyond chal Winning isEverything:ThePresidencyofGeorgeW.Bush When George Bush Senior became President (1988-1992), President became Senior Bush George When Daalder and Lindsay (2003) write that “Bill Clinton’s presi Clinton’s “Bill that write (2003) Lindsay and Daalder use force abroad. With the check of Soviet power removed, the to willing more States United the made It consequence: able predict and natural entirely an had moment” “unipolar This ������������������ would support John support would ���������������������������� uincy Adams’ 1821 statement 1821 Adams’ Quincy NAFTA ) that his prede ����������������� In the first Gulf ------h attd ws ht w ae h bg is n h bok. In block”. the on kids big the are “we that was attitude the power. military unchallenged maintaining and world, the throughout democracy or freedom spreading terrorists, defeating meant “winning” context, this In politics. world to approach thing” only the is “winning a of 9/11/01 direction the in moved the Bush attacks, After years. Reagan the of re-play a been has administration Bush the policy, domestic and foreign both In dismissive of international law and were hostile toward the UN. were base Republican the and tanks, think conservative gress, theCon branch, executive the in figures Key States. United the of tendencies unilateral the strengthened election dential orientations. In either case, they are fighting the Devil, who has religious specifically have Others mentalities. anti-communist white, and black with officials administration Bush key of set mind the from results also unilateralism However, cause. their deterrence work against attackers willing to commit suicide for does Nor impossible. politically and suicidal is enemy an such in to cheek other the Turning justified can. we as them of many as killing are we and Devil; the are allies their and erners extraordinarily simplistic and brutal: God is on our side; west is philosophy BinLaden’s Osama unilateralism. U.S. justifies law applied. international nor domestic neither where Cuba, Bay, tánamo the UN Security Council and created a legal black hole at Guan Treaty. ment with India that undermined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation agree an negotiated and Convention, Weapons Biological the to protocol a new opposed arms, small in trafficking control to pact a opposed Treaty, Rome the ratify to refused Russia, with Treaty Ban Test Comprehensive the from Proto withdrew Kyoto col, the rejected He back. held be to want not did Bush felt that he did not need the international community and States, United the like players dominant favor to tend politics spite of the fact that the rules and the referees of international The victory of George W. Bush in the disputed 2000 presi 2000 disputed the in Bush W. George of victory The It can be argued that the tactics of the Al the of tactics the that argued be can It 4 5 tions inHaiti,Bosnia,andKosovo.(p.26) in 1992, and continued during the Clinton years with interven Gulf War in 1991, and the humanitarian intervention in Somalia Persian the 1989, in Panama of invasion the with ministration seas military interventions that began during the first Bush ad whenever it chose and wherever practically intervene to free was States United In several power centers of the Bush administration, Bush the of centers power several In He also went to war with Iraq without the sanction of sanction the without Iraq with war to went also He 6 — a fact reflected in the proliferation of over CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 The Economist. The aeda terrorists Qaeda ------8 SeeSands(2005). . wasoneofthemanycasualties September11”(p.5). prevention and preemption between distinction old “the that argues (2005) Gaddis Lewis John (2006). Okerstrom of 2 chapter and 2005) (2003; Jervis See 7 (2003) Kagan are. they than alliances and law international in interested more are Europeans why understand citizens U.S. help would perspective their Assuming countries. other in ple only superpower. This is the way the world looks to most peo world’s the not were country this if say, to is that block”, the on kid “big the not were States United the if attacks 9/11/01 the as such problem a view would country the how consider (p.53). others” for prescribes it rules the by bound itself not “is power imperial force the rules of a order.” However, the interstate hierarchical en and “create should States United the empire, an as that, is (2003) Rosen Peter more Stephen to the in point suggesting States. United the of interests commercial) or financial ally (usu immediate the serves it where except law international of development the toward antagonistic been has policy eign for Bush law. international of principles establishing in ested inter not is administration Bush The point: key the misses says law,” Singer, true, this is Although “this (p.183). criterion hopeless” international of principle a as “But around.” way other the not but ones, evil against preemptively striking in justified are nations “good be: really may position Bush’s that information, reliable sustained. be cannot highly of and law, international and alliances international undermines existence the assumes Bush the argued, of have doctrine analysts many As 183). (p. [in 2003]” States United the against strike preemptive a making in justified been have would Korea North . . . strike. preemptive a making in justified is nation threatened “the (2004), Singer Peter writes nation,” another threatens destruction mass of weapons of possession in nation “a that principle the of basis the On country. this attack might they that premise the under States, United the attack to have threatened that nor attacked countries neither attack disagreed—to world the of rest the and Council) Security UN (the referee main the if —even right the claimed administration Bush the when occurred This terrorists. non-state to opposed as states, normal with rules and theremustbenocompromise. any means can be justified in fighting him. There are few rules War to terrorism Cold today. The Devil the is so evil during and so powerful communism that from form his changed simply CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 oh h Bs amnsrto ad .. iies should citizens U.S. and administration Bush the Both In the ignore we when arise problems serious most The h Peiet f od n Evil and Good of President The preventive 7
—as opposed to pre-emptive—war, pre-emptive—war, to opposed —as , Singer (2004) writes writes (2004) Singer , - - - - - 8 side of the United States. This time in Iraq, the with Great Britain as on was opinion public world casualties, Iraqi substantial very of spite in and, died); Americans 300 than (less liberated $61-71 billion cost; combat fatalities stopped once the of billion $53 up picked Senior Bush George by together put coalition broad the war, Iraq fist the During difficult. too and expensive too is legitimacy, international of absence the to go it alone. But the moment could not last. Unilateralism, in U.S. position: explains the difference between the European position and the rest oftheworld”(p.xiii). the by hated and feared so been States United the has history American in before never . . “. 2004: in wrote Jr. Schlesinger, with the war without UN Security Council authorization. Arthur ahead went it Britain, Great with together when, States United 12054 its limits. World public opinion turned dramatically against the paper to stretched is military U.S. the manpower, of terms In transporta working tion. Air Medical required had 37,659 Reserch 10/01/07, by and dead were Economic military U.S. the of members 3,849 09/03/07, of Bureau (2006, destruction) infrastructure and lives of (loss Iraq to costs or oil, of costs increased the countries, other to costs include not does figure This 2010. by returned troops U.S. all that assuming dollars, trillion a exceed would war the Linda Bilmes concluded in February 2006 that the true costs of dollars. Former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz and billion $466 approximately was 09/04/07, of as Iraq cupying oc and Hussein Saddam defeating of cost direct The week. per dollars billion three about States United the costing rently cur are Afghanistan in operations and Iraq of occupation The high”. very “very, estimate the called Daniels Mitch Director Budget billion. $200 and $100 between being as War Iraq the of cost the estimating for chastised was Lindsey Lawrence sor most of the cost of the war. In January 2002, White House advi its only significant military ally, the United States has picked up In its first six years, the Bush administration had the power Richard E.Hartwig use ofmilitarymight.(p.3) promotion of a liberal order still depend on the possession and and defense the and security true where and unreliable, are rules and laws international where world Hobbesian anarchic tion. . . . Meanwhile, the United States remains mired in . . . an coopera and negotiations transnational and rules and laws of world self-contained a into power beyond moving is it ently, differ little a it put to or power, from away turning is Europe Kuwait was ���������� . s of As ). National National ------91
Ensayos CONfines 92 Ensayos CONfines ertr o Sae meitl atmtd o ear relations repair to attempted immediately State of Secretary career. her in earlier with associated been which had Rice position a policy, foreign U.S. in realism toward shift second term as President. This change coincided with a gradual Bush’s of beginning the at 2004, in State of Secretary to visor provide atraininggroundforterrorists. and oil, of cost the increase East, Middle the destabilize Iran, strengthen to been has war the of outcome geopolitical The enormous. were risks the and Iraq; in democracy working a Al and Hussein between link no was there destruction; mass of weapons no tary threat to the United States or to his neighbors. There were mili no posed Hussein Saddam 2003, In counterproductive. only theworstsinceVietnam”(p.71). or history America’s in error strategic worst the considered be should Iraq of invasion the whether about scholars and diers Monthly in Year” Lost “Bush’s entitled article an published Fallows James 2004, October In Cheney. President Vice of tion direc the at perhaps Defense, of Secretary the of orders on from retired General Jay Garner’s post-war reconstruction team removed reportedly was project this of Director The ignored. was project Iraq of Future 13-volume Department’s State The democratic nation-building, which is a long-term proposition. for set mind appropriate the nor expertise the neither had it war; the winning on focused predictably Pentagon The CIA. the and Department State the marginalizing iii), 2006: al., et (Dobbins Department Defense the to Iraq of reconstruction and governance the for responsibility primary assigned have to administration Bush the for wrongheaded seems it Finally, oners at Abu Grahib was the ultimate public relations disaster. The worldwide dissemination of pictures of U.S. abuse of pris 28-29). 2005: (Luttwak, government Iraqi the up prop which were directly or indirectly blamed on the U.S. occupation forces take. Many of the most heinous crimes of the suicide bombers mis crucial another was Party Bath the to linked officials Iraqi senior of thousands dismiss to decision The Hussein. Saddam of overthrow the by Iraq in generated been had that will good from the demobilization of the Iraqi Army resulting destroyed breakdown most security of the a and looting Widespread tion. for a military victory, proved totally inadequate for the occupa vice and went into Iraq with a small force which, while adequate 10 E.H.Carroncedescribedrealism as theimpactofthinkingonwishing. 38% (PewResearchCenterforthePeople &thePress,2004:1). to 61% from Germany, in and 37%; to 63% from France, in 58%; to 75% from Britain in declined ratings favorability U.S. 2004, March to 2002 summer From 9 Winning isEverything:ThePresidencyofGeorgeW.Bush Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld ignored military ad Condolezza Rice was promoted from National Security Ad and unwise, unnecessary, was Iraq in war ongoing The . He writes: “I have sat through arguments among sol aeda; there was little chance of establishing of chance little was there Qaeda; The Atlantic Atlantic The 10 The new The ------9
point for a draw and going for the two-point play for a win. a for play two-point the for going and draw a for point A coach will sometimes have to choose between kicking happens. an extra rarely This game. close and good exceptionally an play teams football American two when outcome best the win. a for going increase temporarily to option, surge the on decided Bush Iraq. from military U.S. the withdraw gradually Baker—to James and ton Hamil Lee by Group—co-directed Study Iraq bi-partisan the of recommendation central the rejected Bush repudi However, ated. formally not was U.S. goal this of although objective policy, foreign serious a democracy spreading consider to difficult more and more became It waning. be to seemed Cheney Dick President Vice as such hawks policy foreign of power The Group. Study Iraq bi-partisan the by urged been liners—and began to talk to Syria and Iran, something that had hard to anathema was proliferation—which nuclear on Korea North with agreement an reached administration the 2007, In with European allies, which had been damaged by the Iraq War. rules evenifpowerwillaccomplishtheirobjectivesfaster: the by play should citizens U.S. why asks Union, European the be achieved,butnot“won”. can peace “war”; not is terrorism combat to effort An opinion. public and language, reality, Peace”—distorts the “Winning or Terrorism” on War the “Winning in winning—as on focus sive exces an Finally, law. and “referees” of role and the marginalize organizations, international damage compromise, and have serious consequences indeed. It may exclude negotiation may winning on focus excessive an however, politics, national inter of world the In coach. losing the of career the for only consequences has that taste of matter a is This them. against are odds the when outcome—even idealist —the win the for go to want always nearly fans the and players, the coach, The The presente writer has often thought that a tie would be would tie a that thought often has writer presente The air oaa 20) Sceay eea o te oni of Council the of General Secretary (2004), Solana Javier international politicalsystem.(p.75) the international financial system all require rules. So does the and travel, air telecommunications, trade, Global world. ous prosper more and safer a deliver not will alone power that is mats whose rights are in peril. The second and broader answer cause sometimes it is our children, our soldiers and our diplo rights of children, detained soldiers, and diplomats in part be the on treaties sign We same. the do to likely more nations er T������������������������������������������������������������ the number of U.S. troops in that country. He was still he first answer is that bending or amending rules makes oth CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 ------espiss efr ifra gtkeig ucin i U.S. in functions gatekeeping informal perform ters/priests Informal normsareprobablyasimportantformalrules. objective. and honest as seen be must referees the and mate legiti considered be must rules the well, work to “game” the formal referees in the game of politics and government. But for Democrats believedthewarwasjustified. Iraq the of majority the because not of nominee, the was he because War favor in vote Senate Kerry’s John behind rallied Party Democratic the example, for 2003, In elections. primary the in victorious emerges candidate Presidential whatever of preferences policy the essentially support will are which machines States electoral United the in Parties Republican and Democratic national The winner. a like looked and Texas, of Governor was name, famous a had he because but President, publican Party in 1999, not because he was well qualified to be Re the of candidate presidential the as chosen was example, for Bush, game. this in importance paramount of is Winning Politicians, who are often lawyers, are the most visible players. of Representatives, the Presidency, and the Senate respectively. two-year, four-year and six-year electoral cycles for the House with “game” a is It football. in than longer are periods playing internal rules. own their create bodies Legislative 24). 2007: (Lazarus, them” apply they rules; the make don’t Umpires umpires. like “are Roberts, John Justice Chief U.S. says “Judges,” courts. federal and state in judges by and agencies administrative and latory laws constitute a subsidiary structure of rules, applied in regu state and National constitutions. state and national the in fied structure. administrative/political underlying an of festation spectators at football games������������������������������������ mes, the rules are applied by referees wearing striped suits. For National Collegiate Athletic Association. In college football ga the of Committees Rules and Sports the of subcommittees by The rules in U.S. collegiate football are determined and modified ington Times, Weekly Standard, National Review, American Spectator, Human Events, Human Spectator, American 13 SeeGough(2003) andMooney(2005). Review, National 12 SeeSchulman(2007:30-33,82)for adescriptionofbloggersasgatekeepers. Standard, Weekly universe oftalkradio,andmostthe punditocracy”(p.225). Times, ington 11 Eric Alterman (2003) writes that the U.S. conservative media include “the Fox News Channel, the CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 h mda aaei isiuin, cetss ad minis and scientists, institutions, academic media, The the are agencies regulatory and judges state and Federal U.S. domestic politics is often considered a game, although speci are politics and government U.S. in rules basic The IV. WINNINGINU.S.DOMESTICPOLITICS , the referees are the visible mani ------1980: 3). Conservatives have their own media establishment. (Salisbury, establishment media liberal the of representative a just now is influence, and esteem, resources, incomparable as recognized universally was increasingly considered liberals or conservatives rather than than rather conservatives or liberals considered increasingly are Judges position. ideological their support who those only employing proliferated, have think-tanks Ideological gress. interest and Politicians Con before testify lawyers. to them with agree who those hire groups of level the to sunk have of. approve they like, and applaud “sound science,” which produces conclusions dis they positions supports which science,” “junk disparage Conservatives science. conservative and liberal is there now fact-checks. someuseful of in spite efficiency, equal with disinformation and information distributes Internet anarchic creatively The find. An institution such as the to hard are “referees” objective Informal, elites. of larization po ideological of period current the during politics above or objective considered the are institutions in or individuals than Few past. successfully less but government, and politics tion abroad,inadditiontothepowerintervene. interven unilateral for rationale plausible a had President the after the events of 9/11/01. Now, with the threat of terrorism, particular, in and, election presidential 2000 November the most of the international community. Everything changed after of support the with but Presidency, Clinton the during Kosovo and Bosnia Haiti, in intervened States United The referees. the ally implies a greater willingness to break the rules and ignore usu force use to willing more being paper, this of language the In (p.24). abroad” force use to willing more States United the made It consequence: predictable and natural entirely an had . . . “This adversary. formidable single, a the without world around deployed were forces military U.S. strong when of the “unipolar” moment after the collapse of the Soviet Union In policy. foreign his dominated philosophy everything” is “winning tic, Bush. This happened for some of the same reasons an idealis of presidency the during policy domestic U.S. in strong larly Bush. to election 2000 abortion and pornography; it lost credibility with liberals in the allowing in U.S. conservatives with The credibility lost law. Court Supreme the interpret objectively who figures neutral www.andrewsullivan.com, the Drudge Report, Rush Limbaugh, the entire A “winning is the only thing” philosophy became particu became philosophy thing” only the is “winning A Richard E.Hartwig Bush v. Gore Gore v. Bush Of Paradise and Power and Paradise Of 12 cec n lne rpeet ojcie truth; objective represents longer no Science Wall Street Journal Street Wall 13 cnmss n evrnetl scientists environmental and Economists decision, which awarded the presidential presidential the awarded which decision, editorial page, the New York Times York New the the , Robert Kagan (2003) writes (2003) Kagan Robert , edn nwppr with newspaper, leading New York Post, Wash Post, York New , which in 1971 11 ------93
Ensayos CONfines 94 Ensayos CONfines (Lipton, 2006).Problems withoutsourcingthereconstruction ofIraqaredocumentedinChandrasekaran (2007). 15 Management of the Deepwater project to modernize the Coast Guard Fleet was delegated to Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman with disastrous results outsourcing and business, of regulation government 9/11/01, and government functionshavealsobeen resistanttochangeonthebasisofevidence. Hussein Saddam between link the warming, global on Policies (2002). Krugman See 14 Act (FISA) Court. Thousands of “national security letters” were letters” security “national of Thousands Court. (FISA) Act Surveillance Intelligence Federal the by authorization required legally without citizens U.S. on eavesdrop to Agency Security National the allowed secretly President the 2001, October In neither they nor the President seemed to respect civil liberties. that argued Opponents state. and church between of separation wall Jefferson’s down tear to wanted they if as acted ten supervision. inadequate Katrina. It outsourced key governmental operations, often with Hurricane of test the failed which Agency, Management gency tailed regulation of business and politicized the Federal Emer cur Bush Programs. Security Social and Medicaid, Medicare, the for crises long-term creating year, a billion $200 roughly by taxes cut simultaneously administration The 9/11/01. of the United States had no major enemies, even after the events when time a at budget, defense the to year per billion $200 over added It rich. the to breaks tax of dollars of billions of hundreds giving years, four in deficit billion $413 a into plus sur billion $127 a turned administration new the reasons, federal government was doing its job�������������������������� in was budget The change��������������������������� climate of threat the of obvious crisis that needed to be addressed, with the exception reality. changing of independently existed which of many answers, the had already They implement. to agenda mestic do idealistic, radical, a had Republicans the policy, foreign in as And large. at world the in as well as domestically grasp their within was Hegemony branch. judicial the of dominance increasing an and Congress of houses both Presidency, the all: it had they Now Representatives. of House the in majority their increased and election off-year 2002 the in Senate the of control regained Republicans The long. last to not was it But Party. Republican the left Jeffords James Senator Vermont resistance for a time when they took control of the Senate after and Bush’s domestic policy legislation. The Democrats offered esced in the Patriot Act, the Ho beforeBush asheconquered Afghanistan andIraq andacqui This was their opportunity to reverse the tide. Congress bowed in the wake of the Watergate Affair in the Nixon administration. lies had long thought that the Presidency had become too weak cess—became a man of steel. Vice President Cheney and his al pro election 2000 disputed the of population—because U.S. beenweakhad andwho illegitimate President a forhalf ofthe U.S. domestic politics as well. The nation rallied around its flag; Winning isEverything:ThePresidencyofGeorgeW.Bush At the beginning of the Bush administration, there was no was there administration, Bush the of beginning the At in moment “unilateral” a created 9/11/01 of attacks The ������������������������������������������ surplus, the country was at peace, and peace, at was country the surplus, 15 Republican leaders of Congress of Congress of leaders Republican meland Security Administration, ������������������������������� —�������������������������� hc ws agl ignored. largely was which . However, for ideological ��� the 14 ------
hn eern t Bs, e a si “hs u tik h’ a he’s thinks guy “This said has he Bush, to referring When warrants. without wiretapping as such areas in power dent’s Presi the limit to conservatives with working is (Oklahoma) Edwards Mickey Congressman Former administration. Bush Norman OrnsteinandThomasMannwrotein2006: scholars Congressional Noted norms. and rules institutional ignored and agencies branch executive oversee to sponsibility re their neglected leaders Congressional Republican jail. in Congress, a number of whose former members have joined him kind, 2006: 37-41). Lobbyists like Jack Abramoff corrupted the used to get around consumer privacy laws after 9/11/01 (Sus might be less oriented toward rules, law, and lawyers than a than lawyers and law, rules, toward oriented less be might business, like more be to government wants which istration, admin Republican a that follows It courts. the of protection the and lawyers, government, need who people poor and ties, The Democratic coalition includes trial lawyers, recent minori a messoftheU.S.government? How could intelligent and experienced people have made such Mexico. with border the controlled not had and aliens illegal Legacy of employment the on laws immigration enforce to failed had Reagan the presidents— previous Bush—like office, in years six after that Betrayed and Policy Analysis for doing so. Many conservatives were outraged America (2006) and was fired from the Dallas-based NationalBankrupted Center for Bush W. wrote Bartlett Bruce staffer Senior Bush Republicans say the war has been mismanaged. Former Reagan and George Cause Government Iraq War was a Big mistake and virtually all presidential candidates Conservative Other Republican presidential candidate Ron and Paul says that the latest the Bush W. Hijacked George How conservative modern the movement, has written of a book entitled guru major Viguerie, Richard 2007). Golberg, in (quoted hell” as scary that’s and monarch, A surprising number of Republicans are now critical of the of critical now are Republicans of number surprising A & Mann,2006:¶2) (Orstein power. governmental of discharge the and resources official of use the favors, of acceptance lobbyists, with lations sider playing fast and loose with everything else, including re con to easier becomes it lawmaking, in game the of rules the with loose and fast play can you If . . . dysfunctional. so cess pro legislative the or sick so culture the seen never have We V. THEROOTSOFACRISIS CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 Glbr, 07 40-46). 2007: (Goldberg, Conservatives Betrayed: Betrayed: Conservatives Imposter: How George George How Imposter: ------
uotation no longer no (Quotation justification.” apparent available atAmericans forTaxreformwebpage) or need the what matter no citizens, of group another to give to citizens of group one from money stealing to party a be not will “I Cleveland: Grover President of quotation a displayed (www.atr.org) Reform Tax for Americans of page web the 2006 January During 17 16 SeeOrnsteinandMann(2006), Mooney(2005). Tax for Americans of President Norquist, Grover like Others, unimportant. relatively policy public of matters long-term ing mak near, is world the of end the that believe Congress U.S. objectivity of social and natural science. Some members of the evidence. by falsification to subject not are which beliefs of consisting fundamentalism, policy lic pub called be might what in believe well) as Democrats some (Suskind, 2004:293). everything…” on concert in and smaller getting and tiny that’s him around circle a than other everyone from off own cut making, his of chamber echo an in caught “was matters, policy of details the in interest little with man incurious an himself, President The B-1). 2006: Andrews, & (Rutenberg Cheney ing taken by a small group of advisors in the White House, includ were 2005 in system Security Social the overhaul to attempt failed the and cuts tax 2003 and 2001 the as such matters on Decisions policy. economic shaping in role substantial administration, a had Bush the in Treasury the of Secretaries two first the Snow, John nor O’Neill Paul Neither channels. cratic Key public policies have been made outside of normal bureau National SecurityCouncilexpertonIraqKennethPollack: former to According Pentagon. the in agency intelligence ture Council in the Vice President’s office; Rumsfeld set up a minia State Department. Cheney set up a miniature National Security mer Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld trusted the CIA or the for nor he Neither outsider. an been always has government, President’s keymenhavebeenanti-government. the sense, practical a and ideological much an both In as possible. as privatized be should operations government that bureaucracies; government rule-based to opposed as forces, market in believe they businessmen, As lawyers. not ticians, businessmen-poli primarily are Cheney Dick President Vice and Bush President Both be. would administration Democratic CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 ay ebr o tdys ainl eulcn lt (and elite Republican national today’s of members Many arena. domestic the in happened has similar Something Vice President Cheney, a man with enormous experience in 2003: 77) (Hersh, them. from information keeping maliciously and ately deliber is bureaucracy professional the that is position Their leadership. the top to wanted directly get theinformationthey to stovepipes created They information. bad getting from ers process that for fifty years had been preventing the policymak filtering existing the dismantle was did people Bush the What 16 In effect, they deny the deny they effect, In ------the additional growth—a lower tax rate would generate more generate would rate tax of lower growth—a additional the and—because productively, invested were savings the if It was a free lunch. You could lower taxes and get more growth rate will stimulate economic growth and increase tax revenues. sold him on the Laffer Curve: the idea that a lower marginal tax and Art Laffer Wanniski converted Reagan to supply-side Jude economics and Kemp, Jack dollars). 2007 constant in trillion ($2.13 billion $909 was debt federal U.S. the when 1980 in office took who Reagan, with began problem The mentalism. ety whichwouldresultfromimplementationofhisproposal. size of government. He has little to say about the type of soci the reducing of goal his achieving on winning, on exclusively Deal. New Roosevelt’s D. Franklin repeal ( years tic Product [GDP]) and suggests doing this again in the next 25 levels in half in 25 years (as a all percentage of the Gross Domes at government of size the cutting is priority one number Norquist’s reason. whatever for income, redistributing of ness busi the in be not should government that believe Reform, ued. In 1988, in his speech to the Republican Party Conven Party Republican the to speech his in 1988, In ued. contin deficits The legitimated. politically was theory the so election, the won had Reagan but economists, with popular not was economics Supply-side accordingly. acted and dends divi payelectoral not does responsibility fiscal that lesson the learned Democrats The taxes. raising advocated openly projections between1982and1986: Failed a describes Stockman 395). (p. arrogant” and imprudent, Revolution radical, was Revolution Reagan Reagan the “The wrote He made. had he mistakes enormous the admitted Why Politics: book his In (1981-89). presidency Reagan’s the Office of Management and Budget for the first five years of of Director as served theory, supply-side of proponent prime a Stockman, David work. always nearly would it that believe to came Reagan but work, might it circumstances, certain Under year. that elections primary Republican the during Economics” “Voodoo this called famously Senior Bush George dollars! tax Supply-side economics is one type of public policy funda policy public of type one is economics Supply-side Reagan won the 1984 election over Walter Mondale, who Mondale, Walter over election 1984 the won Reagan Richard E.Hartwig The Tax Reformer Tax The We’re still We’re not wrong. Stand Itwill pat. go396-397) away. (pp. Jack Kemp, Jude Wanniski, Art Laffer, and Irving Kristol, saying, Roberts, Craig Paul Regan, T. Donald marched in And decade. monstrous deficit infor a excess of $300 billion by heading the middle of shambles, the fiscal a at looking sat, we there So , 2004: 3). In effect, Norquist would Norquist effect, In 3). 2004: , trillion-dollar error trillion-dollar 17 His focus is almost is focus His Soka (1986) Stockman , The Triumph of of Triumph The in the deficit the in ------95
Ensayos CONfines 96 Ensayos CONfines 19 RubinandWeisberg(2003)describe theeconomicpolicyduringClintonadministration. 18 See“TheCollapseofEthicalStandards” (inOrnstein&Mann,2006:184-191). mised bypayingdownthenationaldebt. gress. Neither party could get what it wanted, so they compro Con the in Republicans and Democrats between stalemate a and revenues), tax increased (which boom market stock long a policies, fiscal and economic astute of because happened This 2001. in billion $127 and 2000 in billion $237 pluses: for traditionalnorms. This period saw a notable decline in bipartisanship and respect 2007. to 1994 from continued Representatives of House the Amendment was defeated in the Senate. Republican control of Budget Balanced The economics. Keynesian with square not and a few Republicans as being excessively mechanistic. It did Democrats most by opposed was which Amendment, Budget program, called The Contract for Gingrich America, included a Balanced The failed. ultimately which Washington, in norms political of breach unprecedented an was It everything. was Winning 2003). Weisberg, & (Rubin budget a authorizing not by services government non-essential down shut and crease, in debt a authorizing not by debt federal the on default to Clinton to adopt their positions, House Republicans threatened Office of Technology Assessment in the Congress. To pressure objective the abolished Gingrich rule-following. in interested rarely are Revolutionaries government. federal the in changes revolutionary wanted they past; the in done been had how things learning in interested not were House the in freshman the and Gingrich University. Harvard at orientation” “freshman traditional the attend not did Republicans elected newly The resentatives and installed Newt Gingrich of Georgia as Speaker. Republican voteintheHouseofRepresentatives. tion and promptly raised taxes on the wealthy, without a single Perot Ross candidate Third-party cut. tax 15% additional an pro posed nevertheless candidate, presidential Republican 1996 the Dole, Bob Senator Tables). Historical 2004, Year Fiscal for (Budget 64.4% to 33.3% from increased GDP the of centage elections forhavingdoneso. taxes raise during his presidency, did but apologized during He the 1992 primary taxes.” new no lips: my “Read applause: wild to said Senior Bush George candidate presidential tion, Winning isEverything:ThePresidencyofGeorgeW.Bush sur budget were there years, Clinton the of end the By In 1994, the Republicans took control of the House of Rep per a as Debt Federal Gross the 1992, and 1980 Between
did did make the deficit an issue. Bill Clinton won the elec the won Clinton Bill issue. an deficit the make 18 19 ------uh o mlmn hs oeg ad oetc oiy prefer policy domestic and foreign his implement to Bush allowed which attacks, 9/11/01 the by strengthened was tion administra His election. 2000 the resolved finally which sion Times like $100 billion rather than $1.9 trillion ( more be to likely was surplus budgetary ten-year the that ing say article printed widely a written had 1995, to 1989 from the CBO estimate, although Robert D. Reischauer, CBO Director of reliability the questioned candidate Neither rich. the ward to biased not cut tax smaller a proposed Gore Al candidate Democratic ¶16). §5 2003: Krugman, (Paul year per $330,000 exceeded incomes whose families, to American of 1% richest the go to were cut tax this of 42% fact, In ladder.” economic the of end bottom the at people the to goes help the of jority $1.9 trillion over the next decade. Bush said that “the vast ma to up of surplus budget a possible of projection (CBO) Office Budget Congressional a citing cut, tax enormous an proposed paign. In a nationally televised election debate, George W. Bush O’Neill deplores the absence of Brandeis briefs in the first first the in briefs Brandeis of absence the deplores O’Neill alternatives. policy different of ad disadvantages the and vantages described which analyses issue careful were these Brandeis, Louis Justice Court Supreme after Named issues. jor and major departments to prepare “Brandeis briefs” on all ma President Nixon ordered the Office of Management and Budget O’Neill which he found in Paul the Bush White House. O’Neill that describes how to of administration Nixon the in observed he process ing Education the and Bush Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill contrasts the policy-mak House, White policy office: faith-based House White the of head former Jr., DiIulio J. John the ultimate goal of winning re-election in According to 2004. ences. In all he did, however, there was unceasing attention to Bush became President by virtue of a Supreme Court deci Court Supreme a of virtue by President became Bush cam election 2000 the during returned lunch free The n Suskind’s In , 2000:A-9). 2004: 170-171) (Suskind, analysis. and substance policy about all at worried who House] White the [of Wing West the in people of couple a only told, be truth were, There issues. domestic on papers ing run by the political arm”. There were no actual policy white everything—be mean I everything—and is got you’ve What . . . apparatus. policy a of lack complete a one: this in on going is what for House White modern any in precedent no is There The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the the Bush, W. George Loyalty: of Price The CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 Corpus Christi Caller Caller Christi Corpus (2003), former (2003), ------inhofe.senate.gov/pressreleases/climate.htm> 22 21 SeeKrugman(2002). Canada collected38.2%ofGDPintaxes; France,45.8%;andSweden,52.2%. taxes U.S. all (2003), Krugman Paul to According 20 (Zeller, 2040” 2005: 42).Walkerwrites: by government] federal the [of revenues tax projected [total] exceed will alone debt federal the on interest expire, to slated now cuts, tax recent extend administration lowest level since 1950 (Zeller, 2005: 40). “If Congress and the the GDP, of 16% only raising while GDP of 20% spending now gove��������� Walker, David General Comptroller to cording Ac rise. rates interest and continue deficits huge as rapidly increase to likely are budget, federal the of 19% now debt, the (Hall, llion replaced. was and cuts tax the about unenthusiastic was O’Neill matter.” deficits don’t proved “Reagan President) (former White that the staff with House team economic senior the of meeting a ing dur saying as Cheney President Vice quotes O’Neill Paul tary Secre Treasury (p.56). taxes” cutting than war a of face the in important more is “Nothing saying: as DeLay Tom Leader and Iraq. Afghanistan in wars subsequent the and attacks, 9/11/01 the face ofrecession, the in appeared cuts the for justifications country. low-tax comparatively a is States United the that fact the or situation fiscal the of regardless pursued be to Congress in Party Republican the and administration Bush the Suskind, in 167-169). 2004: quoted (O’Neill distinction” huge a It’s politics. about mostly be to seemed gang the and Karen, Dick, Karl, and analysis, and evidence about mostly was group our that is now and administration] Nixon [the then between ference dif biggest “The default. by decisions making be to seemed Rice, Condoleezza increasingly, and, Hughes Karen Rove, Karl Cheney, of composed group small a that saying Bush, of term CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 Quotations extracted from an Inhofe Senate floor speech entitled “The Science of Climate Change,” July 28,2003.Complete speech is availableat Ensayos CONfines 98 Ensayos CONfines 27 SeeSavage(2006). 26 SeeBamford(2005)onwarrantless monitoringofU.S.citizensbytheNationalSecurityAgency. (in effect,ifnotintheory),andtherule oflaw. 25 Since 1980, the Republican Party in government has reversed its policies on deficits, prudence in international relations, nation building, small government 24 SeeKrugman(2005). 23 Seealsochapter4entitled“ConvenientUntruths”ofGore(2007:100-128). 28 Thiswasblocked byasmallbi-partisangroupofsenators. eas o te 06 i-em lcin. n h cs o the U.S. Senate, liberal science and of policy positions were politically case the In elections. mid-term 2006 the of because largely but issues, other and matters environmental on 2007 continued. cient power that he did not have to listen and calls for tax cuts world inwhichallegiancetoitsteamtookpriority. 46-47). (pp. integration could ignite trade protectionism and threaten global economic U.S. gross national product was reaching a critical stage, which (2004) argued that U.S. spending and the deficit of Summersabout 5% of attention. command would University), Harvard of President becoming (before administration Clinton second the in Treasury the of Secretary as served successfully who Bank World the for Economist Chief former a Summers, Lawrence you maygetit. because for, wish you what careful be should you that it has wisdom folk American dangerous. be can winning However, parties. political by positions policy of reversals astonishing the explain helps which objectives, particular accomplish to “us” (our country or political party) to win more than they want want often People objectives. of formal to process prior is the identification that in alike are teams football and parties, political Nations, party. political a usually is team” elec “our tions, national In group. ethnic or religious a be also may it although rituals, and symbols patriotic its with nation-state, the usually is team” “our politics, international of world the In psychological process of regional or institutional identification. a through organization the with and other each with bonded have who people of consists It organization. an than more of consists team” “our or team” “Their win. to team “their” want still would fans the and players the of most and coach the fire could organization Cowboy Dallas The fans? the to important fessional level because it brings fame and fortune. But why is it Winning is important to the players and the coaches at the pro is. just it win; to important is it why ask seldom People form. purist its in winning of examples are games football American legitimated byafewthousandvotesinVirginiaandMontana. Winning isEverything:ThePresidencyofGeorgeW.Bush Until the 2006 mid-term elections, the President had suffi 24 The direction of public policy began to change in change to began policy public of direction The VII. BUSHUNBOUND 23 But the Bush White House lived in a in lived House White Bush the But 25 - - - government. government. cize and the of other Department agencies Justice the national politi to made were Efforts 2006). (Hersh, weapons nuclear the in U.S. Senate. rule Filibuster the abolishing of option” “nuclear the proposed It branch. executive the of oversight little be would there that ensured and matters legislative in discipline party positions. his override to ability Congress’s limited sharply tactic This enforce. to plan not did and laws authorization. unconstitutional 800 considered he some of court parts indicating without statements issued Bush calls telephone U.S. citizens’ on in listened Agency Security National The necessary. considered were restraints few States; United the of CEO or Minister Prime were he if as acted Bush victory. famous a was It election. presidential the 2004: November in politics U.S. of Bowl Super the won and majority Republican permanent a create to attempted team His 9/11/01. the of events the after (Tyler, 2004:A11).GeorgeCrile(2003)writes: Afghanistan in rule-breaking part of orgy in previous a is of result UN, the the of Charter the of breach illegal an called recruiting groundforterrorists. a and school a become has Iraq worse, Even limit. time no is the In way. their in referred football gets terms, there are no rules who or referees and there anyone kill to prepared and beliefs their for die to willing are insurgents The personnel. no have do, and weapons of resources they significant command and scruples, than more even win to want who people encountered administration U.S. the Iraq, in insurgents the In resources. and skills of set different a requires which process and in Iraq. But he failed to “win the peace” in either country—a The President appeared to have won the wars in Afghanistan government the national of control effective won Bush has Annan Kofi General Secretary UN which War, Iraq The damentalist warriors to fight against our common Soviet en Soviet common our against fight to warriors damentalist CIA secretly armed and trained several hundred thousand fun the that history; modern in jihad successful most and largest the sponsored government U.S. the 1990s, early and 1980s terrorists], it would seem relevant that for over a decade in the [Islamic enemy new this of sense make to trying anyone For 27 28 Republican leadership in the Congress enforced enforced Congress the in leadership Republican Operational plans were made to Operational Iran attack with CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 26 - - - n te rc t “u on kids”. own “our to price the ing includ price, any at elections winning of theology pragmatic much pain,ifonlytheycancontrolthegovernmentagain. without problems these all fix can they that say good, greater the for lie to temptation the to immune not Democrats, The generations. future impoverishing and rich the favoring ously same-sex marriage, and stem-cell research—while simultane abortion, like issues moral emphasizing base, religious their until 2006, allowing them to win elections by identification with successful was strategy The spectrum. political the of middle the straddle to trying than rather supporters core their to ing kids” (p.xxv). The Republicans have adopted a strategy of play own our to cost the cost—including any at elections win to is which theology, pragmatic a call might one what adopted . . . hegemony abroad. U.S. maintaining of objective policy foreign the with patible not sustainable. Bankrupting the federal government is incom are wartime in cuts tax Huge taxes. lower for call that policies domestic with reconciled be cannot objectives policy its foreign haswritten, 26) (2004: Leffler Melvyn As schizophrenic. CONfines 4/7enero-mayo 2008 eesn s rn aot n tig te at bu the about part the thing: one about wrong is Peterson parties political both . . “. that: says (2004) Peterson Peter is it that is presidency Bush the of irony ultimate The veterans ofthatearlierCIA-sponsoredjihad.(p.508) were America targeted now who those of many that and emy; Their kids will be fine. The fine. be will kids - - - - opoie rls n rfre, ihr t oe r abroad. There or home at either referees, and rules compromise, without along get cannot we because country our about worry the remainder of his presidency. It is the rest of us. We have to that ofFranklinD.Roosevelt. wish to place Reagan’s image on the American dime, to replace who those are there already, and GDP, the of percentage a as Reagan and George Bush Senior who doubled the national debt be will it fail, somebody else’s fault. Few remember today that it was Ronald programs these when And House. White the leaves Bush after decline will Medicaid and Medicare Security, Social debt. national our finance to rates interest higher mand de foreigners as quietly rise will Prices falls. it as sound no strikes, it will be silent. Iraq is noisy, but the U.S. dollar makes tion, food, shelter or medical care in retirement. When disaster educa good a jobs, without go not will families their Iraq; in help create, have won the lottery of life. would tax inheritance the of abolition progressive the which upper-class hereditary the of those and children President’s etn o a imne ipretbe vay, discovering aviary”, again “theinflexibleandmortallimitationsofitsfreedom.” imperceptible immense, an of netting wire the against wings its break and head its 1929—“smash in —as again once will eagle American the environment, our and system, legal international and domestic the society, our currency, our degrade we if them, ignore we If nature. of and It is not Bush who has to worry about what happens during Richard E.Hartwig are are as f e, f cnmc, f ua behavior human of economics, of men, of laws They will not be killed - - 99 Ensayos CONfines 100 Ensayos CONfines Peterson, P. (2004). Ostrovsky, V.&Hoy,C.(1991). Ornstein N. & Mann, T. (2006, January 19). ”If You Give a Congressman a Cookie”. Okerstrom, D.(2006). Norquist, G.(2004).“WeWantLess”. Mooney, M.(2005). Mann, T. & Ornstein, N. (2006). Mann, J.(2004). Luttwak, E.(2005).“Iraq:TheLogicofDisengagement”. Lipton, E.(2006,December9).“BillionsLater,PlantoRemaketheCoastGuardFleetStumbles,” Leffler, M.(2004).“Bush’sForeignPolicy,” Lazarus, S.(2007).“MorePolarizingthanRehnquist”. ____ Con”. Tax-cut “The 14). September ____(2003, Krugman, P. (2002, August 30). “Just Trust Us”. Kagan, R.(2003). ____(2005). “WhytheBushDoctrineCannotbeSustained”. Jervis, R.(2003).“UnderstandingtheBushDoctrine”. ____ Hersh, S.(2003,October27).“TheStovepipe”. (2007). E. Hall, Gough, M.(ed.)(2003). Gore, A.(2007). Goldberg, J.(2007,June4).“PartyUnfaithful:TheRepublicanImplosion”. Gaddis, J.L.(2005).“GrandStrategyintheSecondTerm”. “From BadtoWorse:America’sNuclearDealwithIndia”.(2006,July2). Fallows, J.(2004)“Bush’sLostYear”. Dobbins, J.,Jones,S.,Crane,K.&DeGrasse,B.(2006). Daalder, I.&Lindsay,J.(2003). Crile, G.(2003). Chandrasekaran, R.(2007). Couloumbis, T.&Wolfe,J.(1990). Bilmes, L. & Stiglitz, J. (2006). Barzini, L.(1977). Bamford, J.(2005,December25).“TheAgencyThatCouldbeBigBrother,” Aronoff, Y.(2006).“InLikeaLamb,OutLion:ThePoliticalConversionofJimmyCarter”. Treasury”. Head to List Atop Seen “Evans 27). May (2006, J. Rutenberg, & E. Andrews, Alterman, E.(2003). References Winning isEverything:ThePresidencyofGeorgeW.Bush It. It. A23. Retrieved in July 2007. Available at: . Available at: Ensayos CONfines