More Bush Bashing

In a shocking article, Robert Novak this week reported on bashing of Bush.
The bashing was not from the left but rather from right wingers. Here is the
article as it appeared in the
Chicago
Sun-Times.

Bashing by elite group should worry
Bush

September 22, 2005

BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

ASPEN, Colo. — For two full days, President Bush was bashed. He was
taken to task on his handling of stem cell research, population control, the
Iraq war and, especially, Hurricane Katrina. The critics were no left-wing
bloggers. They were rich, mainly Republican and presumably Bush voters in
the last two presidential elections.

The Bush-bashing occurred last weekend at the annual Aspen conference
sponsored by the New York investment firm Forstmann Little & Co. More than
200 invited guests, mostly prestigious, arrived Thursday (many by private
aircraft) and stayed until Sunday for more than golf, hikes and gourmet
meals. They faithfully attended the discussions presided over by PBS’
Charlie Rose on such serious subjects as ”global poverty and human rights”
and ”the ‘new’ world economy.” The connecting link was hostility to Bush.

”All discussions are off the record,” admonished the conference’s
printed schedule. Consequently, I will refrain from specifically quoting
panelists and audience members. But the admonition says nothing about
personal conversations outside the sessions. Nor do I feel inhibited in
quoting myself. Even if I am violating the spirit of secrecy rules,
revealing criticism of Bush by this elite group, and the paucity of defense
for him, is valuable in reflecting the president’s parlous political
condition.

The Forstmann Little Aspen Weekend is made possible by the generosity of
Theodore J. Forstmann, a supporter of supply-side economics and contributor
to the Republican Party. Invited guests are drawn from government,
diplomacy, politics, the arts, entertainment and journalism.

I was surprised that the program indicated the first panel, on stem cell
research, consisted solely of scientists hostile to the Bush
administration’s position. In the absence of any disagreement, I took the
floor to suggest there are scientists and bioethicists with dissenting views
and that it was not productive to demean opposing views as based on
”religious dogma.” The response was peeved criticism of my intervention
and certainly no support.

I do not see myself as a defender of the Bush presidency, and I am sure
the White House does not regard me as such. But as a member of the second
panel consisting of journalists, I felt constrained to argue against
implications that Hurricane Katrina should cause Bush to rediscover race and
poverty. My comments again generated more criticism from the audience and
obvious exasperation by Rose. After the closing dinner Saturday night, the
moderator made clear he was displeased by my conduct.

After the first two panels, I feared I was the odd man out in accepting
Teddy Forstmann’s invitation. But during a break, one of the president’s
closest friends — who had remained silent — thanked me profusely for my
comments. That set a pattern. Throughout the next two days, men and women
who were mute publicly thanked me privately for speaking up. When I said
nothing during one panel discussion, some people asked me why I was silent.

Longtime participants in Forstmann Little conferences (this was my first
and, after this column, probably my last) told me they had not experienced
such hostility against a Republican president at previous events. Yet, they
were sure a majority of the guests had voted for Bush.

This analysis was reported to me over lunch by a financier who regularly
attends these events. When he said he shared my sentiments, I asked why he
did not express them publicly at a session. He replied that he did not feel
able to articulate what he felt. Critics of the president who are vocal and
supporters who are reticent comprise a massive communications failure.

U.S. News & World Report disclosed this week, with apparent disdain, that
presidential adviser Karl Rove took time off from the Katrina relief effort
to be at Aspen. He was needed as a counterweight. I settled in for serious
fireworks, expecting Bush-bashers to assault his alter ego at the
conference’s final session. However, direct confrontation with a senior aide
must have been more difficult than a remote attack on the president. It
would be a shame if Rove returned to Washington without informing Bush how
erstwhile friends have turned against him

Bush’s support is rapidly dwindling away across the board. He has to make some
radical policy shifts in order to save his second term and set a legacy. If he
does not his legacy will be the longest term lame duck.