in play now. Especially as the Dems manage to unearth more and more and more of this disgraceful shit. It's almost like the making of sausages. You like 'em. Just don't wanna know what's in 'em, or how they're made. In this case, those who "bought" the bush crap liked the sound and the look of it, especially early-on when everything seemed to be coming up roses and bush himself seemed invincible. But now we find out his whole thing is full of rat hairs and mouse pellets and bug bits and hog noses and floor dirt. WE knew this going in because we cared enough to make ourselves fully informed. But many others mindlessly trusted and bought the bullshit. And now they're seeing what's gone on behind the curtain and it offends their delicate sensibilities.
And one more thing, too. I think there are people in this country (and in EVERY country) whose self-image is caught up in the strength, macho, health, and virility of their leadership. The words you heard most frequently about John F. Kennedy were words like "young" and "vigor." And everybody loved that, especially coming out of the Eisenhauer era when all you got was elderly gents with no hair and heart attacks. Along comes a guy with a full head of dark, thick hair, relatively wrinkle-free skin and no age spots, tanned with muscles and sense of great fitness, a guy who's into contact sports, and his wife is elegant and charming and looks like a fashion model instead of a grandma. Everybody glommed onto that. America fell in love. That's how we saw ourselves. That's now we got to see ourselves now. New and improved! Young and vigorous. Vitality Incorporated. And when they were on view, whether they traveled or not, THAT was our face to the world. THEY were Mr. and Mrs. America, and we ALL reaped the benefit from it. Who wouldn't want to be associated with that, or have THAT representing them, image-wise? To a lesser, once-removed extent, that's what we got with the Clintons after years of doddering old reagan and his snippy, aging twerp successor bush I (whose wife looked like the guy on the Quaker Oats box). And Clinton had this outgoing, youthful, vigorous charm and sparkle about him and who couldn't love him? And his wife was modern and smart-as-a-whip and had worked as a lawyer so she was a savvy professional who brought a lot to the table, too.
Even in reagan's case, by the time he replaced Jimmy Carter, he brought in a new and, yes, vigorous era, with the sunny smile and the cheery charm and, to some, the movie-star good looks. I read this column in the LA Times by Bill Maher who noted that, at least reagan made people feel good about America, and about being Americans. That much, at least at first, was correct, and Jimmy Carter unfortunately left us in a bad mood from the hostage crisis and his landmark speech about the general American malaise. He was depressing, if truthful (and sometimes people don't want to know the truth). reagan came along with "Morning in America! YAY!" New and improved! YAY! Don't worry, be happy! YAY!
Look what we have now. Except in this case, we have things SO MUCH WORSE, SO MUCH MORE CORRUPT, even CRIMINAL, SO MUCH MORE SCANDALOUS on so many fronts you can't even count that high anymore.
I also think that bush II had this swagger and strut that he kidded about, at first (YEAH, SUUUUUURE) with the "it'd be a lot better if this was a dictatorship and I was the dictator" stuff. Remember "l'etat c'est moi"? The French king Louis the XIV, the so-called Sun King, who strutted and posed and declared "I am the state"?
The phrase "L'État, c'est moi" ("I am the State") is frequently attributed to him, though this is considered by historians to be a historical inaccuracy and is more likely to have been conceived by political opponents as a way of confirming the stereotypical view of the absolutism he represented.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_XIV_of_France "...the absolutism he represented." Indeed. Remind you of anybody? Well, it was so for Louis the XIV, and it's been true in dubya's mind, too (and in the minds of his sycophants and supporters and apologists and cover-up crews) for a long time. And I guess some people need, or needed, that strong absolutist, no-questions-allowed father-figure. bush certainly WANTED to be that. After all, he had a prominent, accomplished, and previously powerful dad to show up. And others around him wanted that, too. In the schoolyard, it was always preferable to hang out with the toughest bully. It made YOU tough, too, by association. But now, it's becoming painfully obvious to EVERYONE how badly we've been misled (well, SOME of us were misled), and what a phony front this all was. And as Americans (and especially other republi-CONS) get too much of a bellyful of this, they're gonna react. And rebel. And you won't be hearing the "I" word (IMPEACHMENT) only from Chuck Hagel.
Crap. I'm really running off at the mouth this evening. Just another fart from some gasbag, I suppose. :D
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
