Monday, January 17, 2005

Again, I'm so surprised

According to the Washington Post,
President Bush will begin his second term in office without a clear mandate to lead the nation, with strong disapproval of his policies in Iraq and with the public both hopeful and dubious about his leadership on the issues that will dominate his agenda, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Okay, I buy it. But how is it that I keep seeing that the President and his cronies claim he has a mandate?

Bush sees his reelection as a mandate to take his conservative revolution to a new level.

"Let me put it to you this way," he said on Nov. 4. "I earned capital in the campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it."

He's spent the months since then laying the groundwork for a series of bold initiatives that have been part of his shopping list as well as the permanent backlist of conservative ideas -- items loved by true believers but previously considered too divisive to put into law.
Hmmm... so what's the real deal?

I know what I think.

1 comment:

  1. If the president doesn't have a clear mandate to lead the nation, what is he supposed to do for the next four years? Just hang around the ranch goofing off? Someone should explain to the good people at the Post that in democracies we have these things called elections, in which people called voters give candidates a mandate to lead.

    ReplyDelete