Outgoing presidents like to “tie up loose ends” and place their ideological stamp on all sorts of governmental regulations and programs. Clinton did it. So did many of his predecessors. Often times, these last minute regulatory efforts take place in the final days or hours of an outgoing presidents term. But because new or revised regulations have a specific path they must take before becoming active, incoming presidents can sometimes halt or even negate these plans. It isn’t uncommon. In fact, when W took office, he ordered a halt to all of Clinton’s last minute regulations that had not yet been published in the federal register.

Hoping to avoid a halt to his own last minute regulations, the Bush administration got the ball rolling early, hoping to have over 90 new or revised regulations on the books before Obama can take the oath of office.  So what’s the problem? Isn’t Bush just doing what many previous outgoing presidents have done? Well, yes…and no.

Where Clinton’s end of term regulations sought to strengthen enviromental policy or help create more parity with regards to publically funded aid programs, it seems that Bush’s regulatory efforts do the exact opposite, and may also add to an already overburdened national treasury.

Some of the changes Bush seeks to stamp in cement before he departs include:

CIVIL LILBERTIES: Expanded F.B.I. guidelines that permit agents to use chillingly intrusive techniques to collect information on Americans even where there is no evidence of wrongdoing.

ENVIRONMENT: Weakening the Endangered Species Act even further; rules that weaken clean air and water standards; opening even more federal lands for gas and oil exploration. Also, easing restrictions on mountaintop mining, removing mining restrictions near the Grand Canyon and easing rules on power plant emissions.

ABORTION RIGHTS: New regulations aimed at further limiting women’s access to abortion, contraceptives and information about their reproductive health care options.

ECONOMIC: Restored tax breaks for banks that take big losses on bad loans inherited through acquisitions. Now that this change is in the works, JPMorgan Chase and others are planning to use their bailout funds for mergers and acquisitions, transactions that will be greatly enhanced by the new tax subsidy.

Bush’s last minute regulations are really more DEREGULATIONS aimed at rewarding those remaining loyalist in corporate America. And if we’ve learned nothing from this whole economic crisis, it’s that when Republicans DEREGULATE it doesn’t bode well for John and Jane America.

Bush wants to leave his mark, but he seems to not understain that what he’s already left (and apparently wants to leave more of) is a big ugly stain. Apparently not content with being the least popular president AND the worst president in US history, Bush wants to make sure he can still screw things up when he’s out clearing brush at the ranch. With an economy in ruins, a military stretched to the breaking point, and an international reputation in tatters, Bush has already tied the hands of his successor to a great degree. But it just doesn’t seem to be enough for the Decider.

Some presidents want to be remembered for the good things they do. Sadly for America, George W. Bush has never done anything good in his life. So if we’re going to remember him for his failures, it seems that he wants to be sure to leave us plenty to ruminate on.

Barack Obama has a tough road ahead of him. So do we all.

(cross posted at Bring It On!)

I’ve got an idea though, and it’s something that I’ve said before. There is a fundamental difference between the campaign of Clinton and Obama, but you have to listen carefully to really hear it. It’s not so much in their policy ideas- both want to help average Americans with health care and the economy; they both talk about developing energy independence and protecting the environment; they both talk about schools and jobs and retirement concerns. And with some minor detail differences, it’s tough to distinguish one message from the other. But there is an overriding difference, and that difference could make all the difference in the world.

The difference is simple- in speech after speech, Clinton’s main focus is what she will do for you. Take a look at her pre-State of the Union remarks today and you will find a whole lot of “I believe this” and “I will do that.” Clinton is so ensconced in the politics of one doing it all for the many that she is missing the driving force behind the Obama candidacy, and the force that is energizing voters in ways not seen in decades. That force is the simple inclusion of us all.

Obama, after his win in South Carollina took some time to thank supporters and stump for the next big contest. Take a peek– notice the almost near absense of the word “I”? Instead, Obama talks about what WE can do, things WE can fix, change WE can make. Obama knows that America is tired of the special interests that tie politicians to corporations, leaving out the American people. We are tired of politics that make the politician and their sinuous ties to corporate money the most important piece of the puzzle. We are finished with the pay to play mentality that all of DC is immersed in. We are ready for a real change, and Obama alone is talking the talk that puts average Americans at the front of that change.

Look, I’m no fool. I know that the kind of change Obama presents won’t magically occur when Obama take the oath of office. That would be but the start. Once elected, he would still face the same intransigent system he is railing against. But is he used his office effectively, and the bully pulpit as well, he could ask the American people to continue the change they began and turn out all the politicians who won’t evolve. He could energize the voters to put new people in place who would feel the need to change the corruption so endemic to our national politics. And to do that, he needs all of us- the “we” he speaks of so much.

Change will not come to American politics unless American voters fight for it and toss the bums out who insist on keeping things as they are. Hillary Clinton’s campaign focus on herself and her abilities is just more of the same- big brother politics that say Americans can’t handle the tasks of government without the “pro’s” running the show. Well Hillary- we’ve seen how badly the “pro’s” have screwed things up. It’s time for a change. And Obama is the only one offering the kind of change we really want and need. The difference between old politics and new politics is easy to spot when you know what to look for. See if you can tell the difference yourself…

From Hillary:

“If you will stand with me, if you here in Connecticut will support me on
February 5th, I promise you that I will get up every single day and wage a
winning campaign against whomever the Republicans nominate.I’ve been up against
Republicans for a very long time now. I was thinking the other day, wouldn’t it
be nice if they just announced that they were embarrassed about what happened to
the country and they weren’t going to run for the White House again? Somehow I
don’t think that is going to happen. I think we will have to wage a vigorous and
winning campaign. Since I have been on the receiving end of their incoming fire
for all of these years and much to their dismay, I am still standing here, I
think I know how to take us to victory in November.”

From Obama:

“Yes, we can heal this nation. Yes, we can seize our future. And as we leave
this great state with a new wind at our backs, and we take this journey across
this great country, a country we love, with the message we’ve carried from the
plains of Iowa to the hills of New Hampshire, from the Nevada desert to the
South Carolina coast, the same message we had when we were up and when we were
down, that out of many we are one, that while we breathe we will hope, and where
we are met with cynicism and doubt and fear and those who tell us that we can’t,
we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of the American
people in three simple words: Yes, we can. “

Now ask yourself this question: Do you want a government that views you as a partner or one that views you as a dependent. Because that is the real difference between these two candidates. And that is what you need to think about.

(cross posted at Bring It On!)

For the last year, the MSM has been non-stop in promoting its version of the general election: Clinton vs. Guiliani. Sure, other candidates have gotten their face time and exposure, but by and large, ever since they announced their candidacies, Clinton and Guiliani have “been the ones to beat,” at least so far as the media has been concerned. In Iowa at least, the media and the people are not necessarily of the same mind.

Selecting Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in their primary caucus, Iowa pushed Clinton into 3rd place on the Democrat side of things and Guiliani down to 6th, after Ron Paul even, on the Republican ticket. Perhaps the days of media crowned politicians may finally be coming to an end? Too early to tell, but the signs from Iowa are encouraging.

For Democrats, Iowans chose Obama with 38% of the votes, followed by Edwards with 30% and Hillary with 29%. Republicans gave Huckabee a similar margin with 34% of the votes over Romney’s 25% and McCain and Thompson tying with 13% each.

These returns hold some promise for me personally. Promise in that Americans are finally seeming to come out of their self-induced apathy and are taking an active role in their government. If the 2006 mid-term elections were meant to be a wake-up call to the GOP and the president, then 2008 may well be a wake-up call to all the politicians. Clearly voters are less than happy with the path taken by the Democratic majority in Congress, at least as unhappy as with the GOP led debacle of the last 6 years. Their demand for change has gone unheard and unmet by the politicians and this primary makes it more clear than ever that status quo doesn’t cut it anymore.

Clinton and Guiliani are of the same mold as all the leadership in place now. Obama, Edwards, Huckabee and Romney at least appear to Iowans to show promise of a new direction for America, and voters of both parties are grabbing at that chance.

I like Obama and Edwards, much more than I do Clinton. So from a liberal perspective, I agree with Iowans tonight. And while I think that Huckabee is too religiously oriented for my taste, the last time we had an Arkansan in the White House, things weren’t all that bad.

Of course, one primary does not make a nomination, but already Dodd and Biden are throwing in the towel, and more are sure to follow in the coming days and weeks. The battle is just beginning, and with New Hampshire just ahead, this thing is wide open. But I’m glad to see that the first official contest wasn’t a coronation of media frontrunners or politicians who think they are entitled to and deserve the top job just because “it’s their turn and they’ve earned it.”

(cross posted at Bring It On!)

“Well, the first thing she intends to do, because you can do this without
passing a bill, the first thing she intends to do is to send me and former
President Bush and a number of other people around the world to tell them that
America is open for business and cooperation again,” Clinton said.

Former President Bill Clinton said Monday that the first thing his wife Hillary will do when she reaches the White House is dispatch him and his predecessor, President George H.W. Bush, on an around-the-world mission to repair the damage done to America’s reputation by the current president — Bush’s son, George W. Bush. – CNN Political Ticker

Now you’d think that Bill Clinton, the consumate campaigner, would know better than to say something like this unless he knew it to be true. And since he’s the husband of the candidate, we can assume that he’s not just shooting from the hip. Further consider that Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush have previously teamed up in recent years to provide help to victims of the tsunami in SE Asia in 2005 and to aid victims of Hurricane Katrina. It’s not a far stretch to think that if asked by the next president to go forth and reverse the disaster marked course laid out by W, that these two elder statesmen would do just that.

But the real zinger here is the fact that Bush the elder hasn’t come forth and quieted the not-so-subliminal message that he’s less than pleased with the work of his progeny. In fact, the only statement of any kind from the GOP is this from the RNC:

“In 2009, a Republican president will be working with our friends and allies
abroad to continue to keep our nation safe,” said RNC spokesman Danny Diaz. “The
American people expect our leaders — both current and former — to present
serious solutions to the very real challenges confronting our nation.”

Some may look at this statement and say, “What? They are expecting a republican to win the election.” Perhaps. But this statement could also be construed to reflect the message from Bill Clinton. Indeed, a former republican president could be working with friends and allies…

For the Clinton campaign, such a move could be a clear sign that she is worried about a general election run, where she has few fans in the GOP electorate, and not a stellar reputation among DEMs either. By offering to send her famously popular husband, former president Bill Clinton and a famously experienced former GOP president abroad to help fix the mess that W made, she is telling both sides that her administration would seek to bring balanced sanity back into the White House.

It’s a bold ploy for sure, inviting the father of the current president into her camp. It’s surreal that this “invitation” hasn’t been refused.

Then again, maybe Bush Sr. is just trying to find a way to salvage the family image…..

(cross posted at Bring It On!)