Ted Rall seems to think so…
Tag archive for Bush
misconstrue. It's not — I don't feel joyful when somebody loses their
life, nor do I feel joyful from somebody loses a job. That concerns me.
George W. Bush, 11/30/08
Back in September 2002, in a speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations as part of his laborious effort to justify the invasion of Iraq, George Bush asked:
founding, or will it be irrelevant?
Now the wheel has turned, and the man who was once the most powerful leader in the world cannot even get a handshake from his peers. Take a look: The video is stark evidence of the man's utter irrelevance. He can't even look Angela Merkel in the eye. "It's kind of sad," CNN said.
Well, it's almost December 2009, time to start considering some candidates for understatement of the year. Here's one from the veteran team at the McClatchey Newspapers:
I thinking they're messing with us.
Has this ever happened before in American electoral history? President Bush is so unpopular that he has not appeared in public in a single event in support of a Republican candidate this election year.
According to CBS News:
Rose Garden with Mr. Bush: “I intend to have as much possible
campaigning events together, as it is in keeping with the President's
heavy schedule. And I look forward to that opportunity.”
It might prove to be the biggest whopper McCain has uttered during his presidential campaign.
[pic from Yan Zhang, via Flickr]
From the jaw-dropping Andrew Becevich of The American Conservative:
As portrayed by [President Jimmy] Carter, the mistaken idea of freedom was quantitative:
it centered on the never-ending quest for more while exalting narrow
self-interest. His conception of authentic freedom was qualitative: it
meant living in accordance with permanent values. At least by
implication, it meant settling for less.
How Americans dealt with the question of energy, the president
believed, would determine which idea of freedom would prevail. With
this in mind, Carter outlined a six-point program designed to end what
he called “this intolerable dependence on foreign oil.” Although he
expressed confidence that the United States could one day regain energy
independence, he acknowledged that in the near term “there [was] simply
no way to avoid sacrifice.” Implicit in Carter’s speech was the
suggestion that sacrifice just might be a good thing. For the sinner,
penance must necessarily precede redemption.
As an effort to reorient public policy, Carter’s appeal failed
completely. Americans showed little enthusiasm for the president’s
brand of freedom with its connotations of virtuous austerity. Not
liking the message, Americans shot the messenger.
Carter’s speech did enjoy a long and fruitful life—chiefly as fodder
for his political opponents. The most formidable was Ronald Reagan. He
portrayed himself as conservative but was, in fact, the modern prophet
of profligacy—the politician who gave moral sanction to the empire of
consumption. Beguiling his fellow citizens with talk of “morning in
America,” Reagan added to America’s civic religion two crucial beliefs:
credit has no limits, and the bills will never come due. Balance the
books, pay as you go, save for a rainy day—Reagan’s abrogation of these
ancient bits of folk wisdom did as much to recast America’s moral
constitution as did sex, drugs, and rock and roll.
Revolution was never about fiscal responsibility or small government.
Far more accurately than Carter, Reagan understood what made Americans
tick: they wanted self-gratification, not self-denial. Although always
careful to embroider his speeches with inspirational homilies and
testimonials to old-fashioned virtues, Reagan mainly indulged American
The events of
Sept. 11, 2001 only hardened this disposition. Donald Rumsfeld
summarized the prevailing view: “We have two choices. Either we change
the way we live, or we must change the way they live. We choose the
Daniel Larison, a columnist/blogger for the fascinatingly unpredictable American Conservative, in a column sharply points out (here) that the McCain-Palin ticket represents not reform, but a all-out continuation of "Bushism."
In the warped universe of Bush Republicanism, McCain/Palin was the
relatively moderate alternative to the extreme [Joe] Lieberman option. In
truth, by choosing Palin McCain made more of a statement of continuity
with the last eight years than if he had chosen any of the other people
frequently named as possibilities. Naturally, given the Bushist habit
of abusing language, this is being presented as a clean break and a
fresh start. Rhetorically, McCain and Palin have aligned themselves as
the enemies of the status quo, while Obama and Biden are
setting themselves up as the steady preservers of establishment
interests. In reality, however, McCain and Palin are reformers every
bit as much as the invasion of Iraq was a war of self-defense.
Wow. Can’t think of any liberal commentator who has been more critical of the McCain-Palin ticket for what it proposes (as opposed to criticizing lies, etc.).
Unfortunately, the typical "low-information voter" pays little attention to reality, as The Los Angeles Times reveals at the end of a story today:
The Republican ticket was intent on introducing Palin in the best
possible terms, even if they occasionally skated past reality. McCain
and Palin have repeatedly claimed that Palin opposed the infamous
"bridge to nowhere"; actually, she backed it while running for governor but later, when it was under fire, killed it off.
Both have cited her as a foe of earmarks, though she actively sought such budgetary benefits for Alaska.
On Friday, McCain exaggerated Palin’s actions regarding the state
airplane. In her speeches, she has said she put the plane up for sale
on EBay, carefully omitting that it didn’t sell there
and was sold, at a loss, through a plane broker. McCain’s version was
that "she took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and
sold it on EBay. And made a profit!"
The details did not matter to many of the voters Friday who streamed to
see Palin. Julie Ness, a 47-year-old mother of three from West Bend,
Wis., said she hadn’t tuned in to the race until McCain selected Palin.
She said she loved the oft-repeated lines about the bridge and the plane because the comments made Palin "believable."
"She sounds like she’s actually for the people, not for the position or
the money or whatever other status reason they do it for," Ness said.
Great. "A Face in the Crowd" for the 21st century.
What the GOP really is thinking about Gustav…according to Tom Toles:
Quote of the Day:
Karl Rove was impressed with Barack Obama when he first met him. But now he sees him as a “coolly arrogant” elitist. This was Rove’s take on Obama to Republicans at the Capitol Hill Club Monday, according to Christianne Klein of ABC News:
“Even if you never met him, you know this guy. He’s the guy at the Actually, that sounds more like W.
country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette
that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone
who passes by.”
Karl Rove was impressed with Barack Obama when he first met him. But now he sees him as a “coolly arrogant” elitist.
This was Rove’s take on Obama to Republicans at the Capitol Hill Club Monday, according to Christianne Klein of ABC News:
“Even if you never met him, you know this guy. He’s the guy at the
Actually, that sounds more like W.
(via Maureen Dowd)