Umm.. whose government exactly?

There are lots of voices comparing the UAE-ports issue to the Harriet Meirers flambe'. I am inclined to agree. A few parallels:

--I'm not sure what I think of Bush's choice from a substantive perspective. (Glenn Greenwald asks some good questions here.)

--The conservative insurrection is fun to watch.

--The dustup is a distraction that masks far more dangerous issues.

But the issue that I keep coming back to is Bush's imperial presidency. And in striking out at those who have dared to question his choices, this time Bush has said something revealing that seems to have gone unnnoticed.

Bush took the rare step of calling reporters to his conference room on Air Force One after returning from a speech in Colorado. He also stopped to talk before television cameras after he returned to the White House.

"I can understand why some in Congress have raised questions about whether or not our country will be less secure as a result of this transaction," the president said. "But they need to know that our government has looked at this issue and looked at it carefully."

Got that? There's Congress on the one hand. And what Bush considers "our Government" on the other. And never the twain shall meet.

I think this is an exceptionally revealing "tell," in poker parlance. George Bush thinks the only thing wrong with "L'etat c'est moi" is that it is in French. When he says "our government," he means himself -- himself and those completely under his control. Congress, on the other hand, is a fig leaf at best, an annoyance at worst, but certainly not an essential component of our government.

Which, of course, explains a lot more than just Harriet Meiers and the Dubai port deal.

Maybe if we make enough noise about this kind of thing, it might just dawn on the Republicans in Congress that it isn't just their Democratic colleagues who have been gelded by Bush's unprecedented power grab.