We think that Bush will never reverse course, but maybe this time he'll have to flip-flop on the UAE port deal due to intense pressure from his base and voters in general. But don't worry, if and when he does so, this doesn't stop being a "teachable moment" -- in fact, it gets even better.
Until Bush flip-flops on the UAE port deal, we can and must drive home the point that his #1 interest at all times is helping his big contributors, both because that's where his heart lies (Saudi-loving oilman) and because that's where his party's interests lie (ties to the Abramoff Scandal.)
But when he flip-flops, we have another message for the public: we can't trust that he's going to follow through on his word. And that is a huge lesson. More on the flip.
If he flip-flops, every Democrat out there has to sing from the same hymnal:
"We can't trust that he isn't lying about this. We can't trust that once people aren't paying attention he's going to go back and do this anyway."
Gee, why would we think that? The reasons abound:
1. Remember the battle over Social Security?
You know, the battle that we won last year when the public said loud and clear that it didn't trust his cockeyed proposals? Well, it's time to point out that the proposal that we stopped last year, without any notice or fanfare, made it back into his budget this year and it wasn't even noticed for a day (or more?) after the budget was released, it was buried so deeply. [LINK TK]. I'll bet most of the public that is only now paying attention to Bush doesn't know that, and I'll be most of them won't believe it until they see it.
So, lesson 1: We cannot trust Bush to keep his word even after he backs down.
2. Remember Bush's theory of unitary executive power?
This is a national security matter. If you buy Bush's "unitary executive" theory, he can act alone here. Congress can pass a law saying that he can't do this, and he can still do it. Congress can sue Bush and take it to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court can't stop him. This is what it means to have a dictator in the area of foreign policy, folks: the "exception" to representative governance swallows the rule. This is why we can't vest all of our authority in one person, folks: they have an unfortunate tendency to go nuts. [LINK TK]
So, lesson 2: Under Bush's theory of government, if he wants to do this secretly, no one can stop him.
3. If Bush tried to circumvent his promise not to put the UAE in charge, he could do it secretly.
That's right: he could tell his friends in the UAE that they will still get the port security concession so long as they set up a front organization, and we won't know about it for 75-100 years. That's because the Bush Administration is going more nuts with classifying documents than any administration since Nixon's -- or maybe ever. And not only is Bush not letting the public know what's going on, he's not even letting Congress know what's going on. That was the point of Alberto Gonzales's little show in his recent testimony: The President doesn't have to let Congress know whatever he alone decides relates to national security. [LINK TK]
So, lesson 3: Excessive government secrecy lets the Bush Administration do whatever it wants.
4. If anyone tried to blow the whistle, they'd be crushed.
And here we can talk to the public about what the Bush Administration has done to whistleblowers. Not enough room to tell this story in one diary, but you all know it well. He's silenced scientists who tried to tell the truth. He's discredited former Administration officials who have tried to tell the truth. He has let his people reveal the secret identity of a CIA agent who was helping to keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons so he could destroy her whistleblowing husband. If anyone tries to tell the story that the UAE still had its hands in U.S. port security, can we be confident that they would end up in the New York Times instead of Guantanemo Bay? [LINK TK]
So, lesson 4: By intimidating any potential whistleblowers, the Bush Administration can keep a secret forever.
If and when Bush does flip-flop, this becomes the Grand Unified Theory of Bush Administration malfeasance. We have to tell the public that if they really care about a company from a government that supported the Taliban not taking control of aspects of our port security, they must take a stand against the President having too much power. Otherwise, we may never know whether -- after he agrees to change course -- he will just do what he damn pleases anyway.
If we do our jobs right, and the press does its job even halfway right (another topic ripe for a good lesson), this scandal is going to be the gift that keeps on giving. People are finally going to open their eyes and see Bush for what he is. Ponies hell -- we're going to be handing out Clydesdales.