Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
In Defence of George W. Bush
This thread arose due to a clear need to initiate personal and ad hominem attacks on our President (besides, I am always drawn to defend the rhetorical underdog). Well, you can stop hijacking my threads, boys: and dump all your venom, right here!
For once, I am going to have to agree with Mike Sigman. People are getting just too personal, with the attacks on our President. The many rude--and false--comments about his (untested) IQ oversimplify a basically simple man. In effect, you misunderestimate him, the Decider-in-Chief.
You all claim that it was sheer stupidity that sent us into Iraq. OK, granted, it wasn't the greatest idea off the shelf: but let's face it...he didn't Decide to go to war, all by his lonesome. He had lots of help, from Congress to all those misguided souls who voted for him. Where are the piles of blame to be laid at THEIR feet?
Did Bush tell the news stations to start acting like clones of FoxNews? No. Did he TELL Dan Rather to start acting like a soldier, instead of a journalist? In reality, the corporate news media is as much to blame, as the (Unitary) Executive. It seems kind of petty to start getting in W's face, when a whole lot of other people were in on it, cheering the war on our airwaves.
And what about that whole Abu Ghraib/Gitmo mess? No one knows if W approved of it, or not. So, where's the moral condemnation of Rumsfeld, whom we KNOW approved of torture? Yes, true: I can almost hear you respond, "Hey, waitaminute! Bush said we "don't do torture."
OK, you have me there. Sure, Bush is guilty of mendacity: but look at it from his perspective. A lot of cool guys you respect around you are telling you that the gloves are off, we can act outside the Geneva Conventions now. So, you do the same thing you always did, as CEO...you let them all have a long leash, do whatever they pleased, and only listened to a few, trusted advisors.
Is that your fault that some of the boys got a little carried away (over, and over again?)
You see, regarding torture: W's in a quagmire. He set up these extra-judicial laws to try an end-run around international law, in hopes that he could capture the baddies within his term, and be the President Boy Hero of his time. Now, he has to play cover-up: and one thing leads to another...the next thing you know, W's waking up wondering how he's the owner of dozens of secret extrajudical gulags in Asia! How did it all come to this!!!
Really, is it HIS fault that he took the views of the writers of "24" a little too much to heart??
Let's be honest...the vast majority of American's have a coginitive disconnect in relation to the war. They think of it as the "Pentagon's" war, which, operationally, I suppose it is, even tho we're all funding it, and thus culpable. The only way that this war will really hit home (and finally end) is when we institute a draft. So please, enough of all your crying that it's all Bush's fault, etc. He's just a poor figurehead hanging onto whatever ideological furniture that's bolted onto the floor, as his Ship of State sinks sadly into the miasmic swamp of historic folly. Is HE really to blame, for acting like any other politican would, in his place?
And a lot of other evils attributed to him, weren't even invented by him! Bush didn't invent extroadinary rendition...Clinton did. Bush didn't invent signing statements (even tho he has used them as end-runs around bills he doesn't like...and used them, more than all the other Presidents combined). And, did Bush invent placing hostile corporate figures in Cabinet positions to gut agencies like the EPA, the Dept of Agriculture, etc? No, Cabinet position appointments have ALWAYS been political chess pieces.
So spread the blame around where it belongs. Bush might represent a great mismanagement of office, but he is only one man.
To call him stupid or to belittle him, to mock our President, is to forget how dangerous and destructive these people really are.