Conservatives really should not be surprised, although they are profoundly disappointed, with George W. Bush's "Too Bad" governing style, manifested most lately with his direct and intentional attack on his base, which has tried to stand loyally by him throughout his many, many troubles, but finds this pathetic immmigration bill a bridge too far to walk over.

The President really has been governing this way all along. He and his administration have used the "Too Bad" governing approach in dealing with America's allies and most of the world since his administration took office. He has flipped his middle finger to the world many, many times, and many of us looked the other way because we were in general agreement that certain parties needed to be told "Too Bad."

But now the President has turned his "Too Bad" sights on his own base, and it stings a bit. But again, while disappointing and enraging, this should be of no surprise. It is a manifestation of the essential character of George W. Bush.

***

Captain Ed:

"Welcome to the hardball of the Bush administration. We loved it when they used it on Democrats and the war, and it seems just a little hypocritical to start whining about it now that we're getting a taste of it ourselves."

Kate O'Beirne:

Too bad Scooter Libby can't prove that he was in the country illegally before January of this year so he could be pardoned for past offenses. Apparently, President Bush's compassion extends to 12 million illegal aliens but not to someone who loyally and tirelessly served him.

...But uses it to attack conservatives, and impugn their motives for opposing this crappy immigration deal.

The President would have us believe that the War on Terror is the defining issue of our time, yet he refuses to implement a strategy that would credibly and effectively secure the porous Southern border, through which Al Qaeda terrorists could now easily slip through and move to commit an atrocity on the homeland. The President would have us believe that nation states that sponsor terror are equivalent to the terrorists themselves, yet he sits down and talks to Iran, a prime sponsor and producer of terrorism, with the Iranians then proceeding to mock him afterward for making the effort. Little gained there. Altogether embarassing would be an understatement.

Yes, we've been waiting for the President to go on the attack, to get a nerve, to communicate with some semblance of competence and eloquence to the American people, to stand up and stand behind something firmly, to go on the attack and show some political fortitude. We have been waiting for quite some time.

It is most regrettable that Mr. Bush had to use the first occasion of New Found Fortitude to attack the motives of those who have tried to be so strongly supportive. A few more moves like this and the President's remaining credibility with his base is going to go into freefall. Someone wrote last week that Karl Rove "found the last vestige of support for Bush, and is working on destroying that," or words to that effect. Those words ring much more true today.

Looks like it was a terror dry run.

Stephen Hayes:

FRED THOMPSON IS RUNNING for the Republican presidential nomination. In a conference call Monday, Thompson addressed a group of more than 100 supporters and fundraisers whom the campaign has dubbed First Day Founders. He told them that he would be setting up an organization that will allow him to begin raising money and recruiting staff.

More here.

It's here at The Smoking Gun. Funny how we haven't heard much about it in mainstream media, but hear a whole lot about "torture" methods such as waterboarding.

An excerpt:

In a recent raid on an al-Qaeda safe house in Iraq, U.S. military officials recovered an assortment of crude drawings depicting torture methods like "blowtorch to the skin" and "eye removal." Along with the images, which you'll find on the following pages, soldiers seized various torture implements, like meat cleavers, whips, and wire cutters. Photos of those items can be seen here. The images, which were just declassified by the Department of Defense, also include a picture of a ramshackle Baghdad safe house described as an "al-Qaeda torture chamber." It was there, during an April 24 raid, that soldiers found a man suspended from the ceiling by a chain. According to the military, he had been abducted from his job and was being beaten daily by his captors. In a raid earlier this week, Coalition Forces freed five Iraqis who were found in a padlocked room in Karmah. The group, which included a boy, were reportedly beaten with chains, cables, and hoses. Photos showing injuries sustained by those captives can be found here.

The battle is now fully out in the open.

Charles Krauthammer from yesterday's Fox News Special Report panel:

When you get a public opinion poll that shows it has less support than the war in Iraq, you know it’s got trouble. And, actually, for the president to add this on his plate when he’s already reeling on the war in Iraq, very unpopular proposal is a form of political self-immolation. I’m sure is he sincere on this. I know he is. He has talked about it for decades. But this is a hell of a time to do it. And it’s a hell of a bill. . . .

I’d support amnesty, whatever you want to call it, overnight if you could have the president tell us that we have reduced illegal immigration across the southern border by 80 or 90 percent, instead of these bureaucratic triggers.

John Edwards aka Mr. Lightweight doesn't believe that there is a War on Terror. Today Mitt Romney slapped him down:

(Hat tip to Dean Barnett)

George Will:

To those who say border control is impossible -- often these are the same people who said better policing could not substantially reduce crime, until it did -- one answer is: It took just 34 months for the Manhattan Project to progress from the creation of the town of Oak Ridge in the Tennessee wilderness to the atomic explosion at Alamogordo, N.M. That is what America accomplishes when serious.

In an attempt to anesthetize people who sensibly say "border control and workplace enforcement first," important provisions of the legislation would supposedly be "triggered" only when control of the border is "certified" by the president. But in what looks like a parody of the Washington mentality, certification would be triggered not by border control but by the hiring of border control agents and other spending. So, the supposedly hardheaded aspects of the legislation actually rest on the delusion that spending equals the achievement of the intention behind the spending. By that assumption, we have long since tranquilized and democratized Iraq.

Keith Olbermann just doesn't get it, the Democrats NEVER obtained a mandate last November to pull funding for the troops:

Anytime Olbermann is irritated usually means that a good thing has happened for the country.

The delusional netroots believe that the Democrats won their congressional majorities last November because Americans were disgusted about the situation in Iraq. The real reasons for Republican losses were "Mark Foley," and "Macaca," in the U.S House and Senate, respectively. And Democratic leaders know it. Hence their reluctance to push any more timelines and benchmarks on President Bush. They were playing on perilous ground, and they knew it. The American people NEVER granted the Democrats a mandate to usurp the powers of the commander in chief, or to second guess Gen. David Petraeus.

...Is higher than that of his immigration reform bill, on which he hopes to build his legacy.

Victor Davis Hanson:

In the last 60 years, we have been warned in succession that new paradigms in racially pure Germany, the Soviet workers' paradise, Japan Inc. and now 24/7 China all were about to displace the United States. None did. All have had relative moments of amazing success -- but in the end none proved as resilient, flexible and adaptable as America.

That brings us to the United States' greatest strength: radical self-critique. We Americans are worrywarts, always believing we're on the verge of extinction. And so, to "renew," "reinvent" or "save" America, we whip ourselves up about "wars" on poverty, drugs and cancer; space "races;" missile "gaps;" literacy "crusades;" and "campaigns" against litter, waste and smoking.

In other words, we nail-biters have always been paranoid that we must change and improve in order to survive. And thus we usually do -- just in time.

Read it here.

I don't agree with Bob Shrum on much, but I heartily agree with him that John Edwards is a lightweight, especially after reading this.