|
Has anyone else noticed how many DU'ers use the "But Bush/But RepubS" excuse to justify or excuse almost anything that is done by our current administration or congress? You know the "But Bush started these wars," or "But Bush implemented racist airport screening," or "But Bush tortured," or "But Bush tried to ban gay marriage." Or the "But Repukes bent Congressional rules" or "But Repukes had scandals." I suppose its used to make Obama's more and more conservative politics and our congress's more and more deaf ear to our wishes look less bad, by comparing it to the 8 years before. The problem with this of course is two fold.
FIRST, Bush isn't President. Bush hasn't been President for almost a year. Repubs don't have a majority. Repubs haven't had a majority for a year. How is Bush or his Republican cronies relevant at all to whether Obama chooses whether or not to act progressively? Since Bush and the Repubs were so bad, and we contend that everyone agrees with that, wouldn't it be EASIER for Obama and our Democratically-led Congress to be politically progressive without backlash?
SECOND, we spent the last 8 years ripping Shrub and the Repubs apart as dumb, stupid, arrogant, and even pure evil for doing these things. So what's our excuse?
|