yo yo yo search it!

Thursday, September 21, 2006

read this


The Disastrous Rule of a Mayberry Machiavelli
By Sidney Blumenthal, AlterNet Posted on September 20, 2006, Printed on September 20, 2006http://www.alternet.org/story/41808/
The following is an excerpt from How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime (Princeton University Press, 2006).
No one predicted just how radical a president George W. Bush would be. Neither his opponents, nor the reporters covering him, nor his closest campaign aides suggested that he would be the most willfully radical president in American history.
In his 2000 campaign, Bush permitted himself few hints of radicalism. On the contrary he made ready promises of moderation, judiciously offering himself as a "compassionate conservative," an identity carefully crafted to contrast with the discredited Republican radicals of the House of Representatives. After capturing the Congress in 1994 and proclaiming a "revolution," they had twice shut down the government over the budget and staged an impeachment trial that resulted in the acquittal of President Clinton. Seeking to distance himself from the congressional Republicans, Bush declared that he was not hostile to government. He would, he said, "change the tone in Washington." He would be more reasonable than the House Republicans and more moral than Clinton. Governor Bush went out of his way to point to his record of bipartisan cooperation with Democrats in Texas, stressing that he would be "a uniter, not a divider."
Trying to remove the suspicion that falls on conservative Republicans, he pledged that he would protect the solvency of Social Security. On foreign policy, he said he would be "humble": "If we're an arrogant nation, they'll view us that way, but if we're a humble nation, they'll respect us." Here he was criticizing Clinton's peacemaking and nation-building efforts in the Balkans and suggesting he would be far more restrained. The sharpest criticism he made of Clinton's foreign policy was that he would be more mindful of the civil liberties of Arabs accused of terrorism: "Arab-Americans are racially profiled in what's called secret evidence. People are stopped, and we got to do something about that." This statement was not an off-the-cuff remark, but carefully crafted and presented in one of the debates with Vice President Al Gore. Bush's intent was to win an endorsement from the American Muslim Council, which was cued to back him after he delivered his debating point, and it was instrumental in his winning an overwhelming share of Muslims' votes, about 90,000 of which were in Florida.
So Bush deliberately offered himself as an alternative to the divisive congressional Republicans, his father's son (at last) in political temperament, but also experienced as an executive who had learned the art of compromise with the other party, and differing from the incumbent Democratic president only in personality and degree. Bush wanted the press to report and discuss that he would reform and discipline his party, which had gone too far to the right. He encouraged commentary that he represented a "Fourth Way," a variation on the theme of Clinton's "Third Way."

5 comments:

pissed off patricia said...

Well, that's one thing he's good at, lying. What a nightmare.

Donnie McDaniel said...

Got that right POP! The man is a moron of the highest level. Him and the rest of the pirates that have highjacked the country have told so many lies, that they are having problems keeping up with them.

Unknown said...

p o p and donnie, what about the 44% who favor his rule? that is what i worry about. the lemmings. the blind (figuratively) THE INSANE (literally)

michael the tubthumper said...

that photo says it all

and besides... hello again!

Unknown said...

hello again mr the tub! glad to hear from you. i've missed you! (and you couldn't ask for a more perfect photo)