Getty Images
Just to close the loop on Jeb Bush's immigration controversy, the former Florida governor has spent the last couple of days crawling out of a ditch he put himself in, and it appears he's almost out. It's still unclear, however, how the Republican managed to screw up this badly in the first place.
To briefly recap, Bush, an active participant in the larger debate over immigration reform, endorsed a pathway to citizenship as recently as six weeks ago. On Monday, with the release of his new book, Bush took the opposite position, saying he now opposes citizenship. Yesterday morning, Bush told MSNBC his position is complicated, but he's open to the possibility of a pathway to citizenship. Later in the day, he told CNN he can support "both a path to legalization or a path to citizenship."
What in the world is going on with this guy? By lunchtime yesterday, Bush's new line was that he was thrown off by his publishing deadline.
When Bush and coauthor Clint Bolick were writing the book during the 2012 presidential campaign, the GOP was veering far to the right. Republican nominee Mitt Romney had staked out a hard-line position against illegal immigration, blasting his primary rivals as pro-amnesty and promoting "self-deportation" for undocumented workers. Bush sent the book to the printer before Christmas -- weeks before a handful of Senate Republicans embraced a sweeping overhaul that, like the proposals backed by Bush's brother, former President George W. Bush, would allow illegal immigrants to earn citizenship.
In other words, Bush's party unexpectedly moved a lot faster than the book-publishing world.
Here's the deal: Bush was comfortable staying to his party's left on immigration policy. When Mitt Romney ran on the most anti-immigrant platform in a generation, Bush figured he could oppose both Romney's "self-deportation" vision and a pathway to citizenship, occupying a sort of centrist middle ground. But much of his party moved to the left faster than he expected, leaving Bush with a book that left him to the right of most GOP leaders.
At least, that's his newest story. There's reason to believe Bush isn't being entirely honest.
For one thing, in this latest explanation, Bush blames his publishing deadline -- he wrapped up the book in mid-December, staking out a position against a pathway to citizenship before the Senate's bipartisan plan was unveiled. If that were true, why did Bush then co-write a Wall Street Journal op-ed in January -- a month after he turned in his book -- endorsing the same policy his book said he rejects?
For another, as Steve M. noted, all kinds of prominent Republican voices, including Sean Hannity and Lindsey Graham, were endorsing a pathway to citizenship immediately after Election Day in November. How could Bush have missed the writing on the GOP's wall about where the debate was headed?
Also note, the Florida Republican isn't getting tripped up on some obscure detail of a policy debate he doesn't understand -- immigration is supposed to be Jeb Bush's best subject. The former governor, allegedly an intellectual heavyweight in Republican politics, has positioned himself as a credible, leading voice on the ins and outs of immigration policy.
And yet, over the last few months, Bush has been for, against, for, against, sort of for, and largely OK with the most important provision in the debate over comprehensive reform.
The Hill, noting that Bush has been out of public office for six years, may be showing "rust" as he re-enters public life in earnest. That's not quite the first word that comes to my mind, but I suppose it's as good as any.
Leave a Comment:
Yesterday morning, Bush told MSNBC his position is complicated
At first, his position status was "Missionary", but he later changed it to "Three-way standing Sutra flip".
Now, he has re-labeled it as "It's complicated".
That's code for "Hand-job", which is what you get when you've pissed everyone else off.
There is nothing complicated. He is not the decider. Factions of operatives have clustered around Bush as the most promising pathway to GOP control of the White House, and these factions are at war.
It doesn't matter what a Bush says or thinks. They are potted shrubs that may be arranged as needed to configure the best blind. What matters is which factions of advisers are in control of policy.
So who are the key advisers in Bush's current entourage? Who was in control of the book's production. Which among them most frequently espouse the pathway to citizenship, and which the pathway to permanent peasantry?
Please, please, please let this man be the Republicans' nominee in 2016. It will be the best way to insure Democracy into the next decade.
Withay, you may be right. It may depend on what the democrats can do with his latest rationale for running in 2016. His political adviser is quoted in the WP today as saying that "he cares deeply about the future of the party and hopes to play a role in the rebirth of the party...". This shows that he is just another party first, country last republican.
Nah, he's another me-first, party next, country last Republican. If the party wasn't a vehicle for his ambitions, and the country wasn't where he wanted to be president, he wouldn't care about either one at all.
I agree with Withay, the idea that nominating another Bush is the path to success is an indication the conservative bubble is still intact. He can't go with "he's the smart one," since that'll just remind people more of W. "Third time's the charm" won't win over a lot of people either...
You can't make a career out of nuance, but that's what we keep getting. Kinda hard to thread the needle when the size of the hole keeps changing. Bush is about as dynamic as Jell-O, and he's supposed to be the smart one. All I can say is he doesn't have Rove crawling up his arse.
It really doesn't matter what Jeb Bush says or does or how many "iterations" his "story" goes through. Does Jeb Bush really think anyone will vote for the brother of the man who brought this country to its knees?
And judging the current mental state of the Republican Party Via CPAC...
It would appear that unless there are some dramatic changes the primaries in 2016 are going to be Clown Car 2.0 . No serious people need apply.
OH Yeah! I'll show you what hard right is...as they all try to be "severe conservatives"
I'm investing in popcorn futures.
oncearepublican, I hope not, but this crowd changes colors faster than any chameleon I've ever heard of... After all, they got behind Mitt Romney, didn't they?
pol,
You are so right, so it will be up to us to remind everyone what happens when you plant a "Bush" in the White House!!
I was for Citizenship before I was against citizenship before I was for it.
See? It's easy! And John Kerry is a flip-flopper!
I think I am getting Dynasty fatigue...think about it...If Bush or Hilliary were to run and win there would have been with only very short breaks either a Bush or a Clinton in upper escalations the executive branch since 1976...
I am sorry but all politics aside these people need to move out and get their own lives
I don't know if Bush is a kill PBS Republican, yet if he and his brand would simply take a moment and reflect on Big Bird's philosophy, maybe they'd be a little more chill:
"Everyone makes mistakes, so why can't I?" -Big Bird
See, that doesn't hurt so bad as say doubling down on nonsense and digging in with a bring it attitude, but alas, I guess George Bush set the standard for all his successors, including poor ol'Jeb:
Asked if he'd made any mistakes in his first term, President George Bush couldn't think of a one, and boldly said so! -Kevo
just another reminder of why the last thing this country needs is another bush in the white house.
One way to avoid this kind of "problem" is to, you know, develop a position you believe in, say that, and stick to it. I understand that's kind of a novel suggestion.
Relax a bit. It's way to early to handicap the next presidential thing, except for the possible candidates themselves. They are all about keeping options afloat at this time and nothing much else. Tune in 2 years from now.
Is someone handing out score cards so we can keep track? This is harder than professional ping-pong to watch. Maybe a "Follow-the-bouncing-ball"...?
I have a fantasy about the 2016 election. I want to see an election where - on the day after - nearly half of the country is not wailing and screaming that it is the "worst thing that every happened to this country!!!" I kind of did that in 2000 and 2004 and know that others did that in 2008 and 2012.
I was thinking that Jeb Bush (except for being another Bush) might not have scared me all that much. Oh well...........
"Bush has been out of public office for six years, may be showing "rust" "
Is that what you call it Steve or is Jebbie Bush just a paid off hack for rich bastards and missed his que? Actually, it does show very much though how Jebbie does care about people vs. his own self-interests like his back pocket. It's starting to look like the typical Bush Family already full of lies and deceptions as they dish out their load of crap.
The only difference between Jeb and W is that Jeb doesn't make up words on the fly...
7 words: Get that dude off of my monitor.
And the trolls sit out another discussion they can't add trollery to...
Is there now any doubt remaining that the Bush family wanted RawMoney to lose so that Jeb could run in 2016?
No more Bushes! No more Clintons! Bernie Sanders in 2016.
Appearing wishy washy and also being not particularly attractive is not a good start to the campaign. Its not the length of time until the campaign... its the image and impression that you set up as part of the process. He was always the "smart" brother and now he is just a wishy washer who can't seem to tell a straight story about what he believes (ala Romney). Add to that, his brother was a complete failure and he doesnt come across as a modern and fresh alternative to W or what crap the republicans just tried to foist on the country with Romney. Sorry, this guy made a terrible mistep. I wouldn't say that its unfixable at this point, but he needs to stop digging and change the subject. Unfortunately, isn't he doing a book tour on this? Maybe he didn't really want to be President anyway.
What an amazing demonstration of how badly the Bush sons reason.
Jeb got Romney's Etch-A-Sketch and now he is getting hung out to dry in the media. Bush thought he could get away with saying whatever he wants and no one was paying attention. Another Republican politician who thinks video and audio tapes disappear into the ethers.
Sadly, this sort of thing is also bad for Hillary. I love HRC (although I can't stand her 2008 advisors), and I think she'd be a great President. Normally, I'd be excited to support her and have her trounce Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan or Ultrasound Bob.
But then I read and article like this, and my mind leaps to the possibility of a 2016 ballot that is Clinton v. Bush and I cringe about what that says about the stagnation of our country in developing leaders. It actually makes me like Hillary less: I generally don't feel much Clinton fatigue until something stirs my very strong Bush fatigue. Then, irrational or not, Clinton fatigue kind of comes to the surface to go along for the ride.
[Sorry, comment software glitch resulted in double post.]
Look forward to a third Bush war for controlling the oil countries, it is good thing that we have practiced wars abroad for generations, and that we have spent mightily for all the high tech defense programs. We are ready for these wars, and we have to act sooner rather than later. This seems true because that same "star wars" technology deployed since the 80's, has very successfully been deployed to the balance of the world to stimulate world economies. No; this is not a new world order, not a global economic shift, and not anything that might limit the growth of concentrated power. We might want to look for some accounting standard where what was seen as production in one country or another and see the shifts in totals, but any one country might pride fully claim international production also claimed by another. Rather than descend into the accounting morass (rectified by using energy unit cost of production), but just touch on the asset valuations of the US vs. the top 2000 world companies. But this just makes for a lot numbers for accountants.
The global economy can either mean that a few own the most worldwide or is balanced by the most getting along. But global could just mean the corporations are more important than whole countries. But make this easier to digest just consider what would be like to get 100 world class corporations, together to compare successes, a sort bragging conference. One company could say that it controls the global military and defends commerce, all be it one country at a time, another company could point to its dominance of the energy production without which is a danger, and other could show it market position in dominating a country's democratic political system, and another to point out that buying dictators is easier to manage.
Then all is said and done this is really a boring world, just how the wealthy can stand to live such trivial lives, all the wealth under their survey appears the same in growth, in decline and in a world stopped.
The outcome of being wealthy and bored, is that the wealthy seek, fame, notoriety, and the ceremony of courtiers, and political office.
But in Bush's case, it’s a family tradition, to play at doing good, not caring a bit of what is done, and we cannot be sure it was three two wars, or three wars or the last four or was it five. It depends in how far you go back, but is just boring enough not look back at all. What would see in world you cannot change, a whole world left behind.