Bush II
(Or III, I guess, if you count dad.)
Has anyone else noticed that the time since our Proxident’s second inauguration has borne a strong resemblance to the period after his *first* inauguration? I think we’re now seeing what the first Bush administration would have looked like *without* 9-11.
Apart from the rampant lies, the blatant corporate favors, the abuses of power, the ongoing lingual exploration of the Christian right’s ass, and all the dead soldiers…it’s basically a big nothing.
June 21st, 2005 at 6:09 AM
Yep. I love to imagine that the Republicans would be in deep trouble right now without 9/11. Paul O’Neill’s book, The Price of Loyalty, discusses how bad it was in the administration before 9/11. Many people were looking to get out of the Bush administration because it was looking like a sinking ship.
Then 9/11 happened and the press did nothing but kiss his ass for over a year and a half.
Now with his poll numbers in the toilet, maybe the press won’t be so afraid of losing ratings by criticizing him. One can hope.
June 21st, 2005 at 12:13 PM
1) When in 2003-5 has the press been afraid to criticize a Republican President? When in 2002 after the emphasis on Afghanistan decreased?
2) Most Presidential administrations are a big nothing aside from arbitrary choice talking points, and as a Conservative, aside from vicious destruction of our enemies I am pretty pleased when not an incredibly high amount of stuff is meddled with by our government.
June 22nd, 2005 at 6:35 AM
I’d like to know exactly what hasn’t been meddled with by this government.
We’re in a war of choice which is sending Americans off to be killed or maimed.
We’re suddenly being told that there is a State religion.
The Patriot Act is stealing our freedoms left and right.
Fewer and fewer jobs.
Schools being destroyed.
Pollution running rampant and Corporations being let off the hook leaving the profits to the corporations and the bill to the tax payers.
Social Security being threatened…
Is that enough meddling?
I’d like to know what this particular government hasn’t meddled with.
And by the way, I don’t see much vicious destruction of our enemies.
Oh yeah…. and where’s Osama again?
I guess it doesn’t matter much what they really do, as long as there’s an R next to their name everything they say is jes’ fine.
June 22nd, 2005 at 6:55 AM
Notice, I said that the press didn’t criticize him for a year and a half. So for 2003-2005, they’ve been better. Not as good as I’d like, but at least they’re not branding those who criticize him as un-american.
I took personal note when finally some press reports took a critical look at the president. It was a moment when I felt like we were finally coming back to our senses. I don’t have a hard evidence of the day it happened, it was just a general feeling that the press wasn’t afraid to say something bad about Republicans.
I can understand the need for Americans to want to unite against a common threat, but we’re still Americans, and we needed to do more than just rubber stamp anything the president asked for. ESPECIALLY in the lead up to a war.
There was almost no debate from Democrats against the war in Iraq, either.
If you think this President has just been an arbitrary role to offer talking points, then you’re not paying attention. He’s strong armed tons of legislation, that will affect you, since he’s been in office. Not to mention the fact that Bush has thrown us into major debt. And do you think our enemies are destroyed? I think they’re growing in strength, and several recent reports agree with me. We’re helping them recruit more terrorists.
June 23rd, 2005 at 11:13 PM
Yeah, it would almost be funny, if it wasn’t for the whole “getting-our-asses-kicked-in-a-trillion-dollar-war” business.