A Deepening Divide

WaPo reported When terrorists struck on Sept. 11, 2001, Americans came together in grief and resolve, rallying behind President Bush in an extraordinary show of national unity. But when Hurricane Katrina hit last week, the opposite occurred, with Americans dividing along sharply partisan lines in their judgment of the president's and the federal government's response.

On 9/11 the local and state officials did a fantastic job, and worked closely with the federal help when it was made available; with Katrina the local and state officials did not do what their own disaster plans called for, and the Governor was more interested in protecting her power base, than to make the necessary official requests for help, but just expected the Feds to do everything.

The starkly different verdicts on Bush's stewardship of the two biggest crises of his presidency underscore the deepening polarization of the electorate that has occurred on his watch. This gaping divide has left the president with no reservoir of good will among his political opponents at a critical moment of national need and has touched off a fresh debate about whether he could have done anything to prevent it. To his critics, Bush is now reaping what he has sown. Their case against him goes as follows: Facing a divided nation, the president has eschewed unity in both his governing strategy and his political blueprint. These opponents argue that he has favored confrontation over conciliation with the Democrats while favoring a set of policies aimed at deepening support among his conservative base at the expense of ideas that might produce bipartisan consensus and broader approval among the voters.

The President reached out many times, but the Dems, so used to being in control, could not stand being in the minority, and they just fought the President at every step.

His allies and advisers, while acknowledging that polarization has worsened during the past five years, say the opposition party bears the brunt of responsibility. Democrats, by this reckoning, have rebuffed Bush's efforts at bipartisanship, put up a wall to ideas that once enjoyed some support on their side, and, even in the current crisis along the Gulf Coast, are seeking to score political points rather than joining hands with the president to speed the recovery and relief to the victims.

Fighting and scoring political points are all they know.

Cori Dauber blogged I can pretty much guess what the good Professor thinks of governance right after the 2000 election, but what is it he's identifying after 9/11 that was so divisive? What, specifically after this last election? If he's specific (and I can't imagine he wasn't) those details are cut right out of the article.

Attaturk blogged They shouted us down, bullied the pussilanimous Democratic Congressional Delegation (which does deserve its share of blame for being wimps, BUT for exactly the opposite reason of what Bush and his minions claim), and totally fucked up any number of policies. It is all laid out before us.

Patrick Ruffini blogged Balz doesn't examine the profound change in the Democratic Party that comes closest to explaining the sharply disparate reactions to the two disasters. Four years ago, Daily Kos was barely a glimmer in our eye, Joe Lieberman was a frontrunner for the 2004 nomination, Howard Dean was still considered a "moderate", the DLC was still ascendant, the words "liberal" and "lefty" were almost never spoken in polite conversation, The New Republic represented the mainsteam of Democratic thinking inside the Beltway and you wouldn't think twice about calling David Corn and The Nation "far-left." As I've documented, the party's vitriolic reaction to Katrina was shaped on the blogs. Had those blogs been around on 9/11, we would have seen the same response, with immediate cries of "Bush knew."

Bush hasn't changed since 9/11 -- in fact, he's been lambasted for staying so consistent despite changing facts on the ground. But the Democrats have. And it's only fair to call a spade and spade. If they're the ones who changed, then the nation's "divisions" can be laid at their doorstep.