🚀 go-pugleaf

Fear and loathing in America 
Molly Ivins

09.23.03 - AUSTIN, Texas -- Among the more amusing cluckings from the
right lately is their appalled discovery that quite a few Americans
actually think George W. Bush is a terrible president. 

Robert Novak is quoted as saying in all his 44 years of covering
politics, he has never seen anything like the detestation of Bush.
Charles Krauthammer managed to write an entire essay on the topic of
"Bush haters" in Time magazine, as though he had never before come
across such a phenomenon. 

Oh, I stretch memory way back, so far back, all the way back to -- our
last president. Almost lost in the mists of time though it is, I not
only remember eight years of relentless attacks from Clinton-haters, I
also notice they haven't let up yet. Clinton-haters accused the man of
murder, rape, drug-running, sexual harassment, financial chicanery and
official misconduct, and his wife of even worse. 

For eight long years, this country was a zoo of Clinton-haters. Any
idiot with a big mouth and a conspiracy theory could get a hearing on
radio talk shows, "Christian" broadcasts and nutty Internet sites.
People with transparent motives, people paid by tabloid magazines,
people with known mental problems, ancient Clinton enemies with
notoriously racist pasts -- all were given hearings, credence and air
time. Sliming Clinton was a sure road to fame and fortune on the
right, and many an ambitious young right-wing hitman -- like David
Brock, who has since made full confession -- took that golden
opportunity. 

After all this time and all those millions of dollars wasted, no one
has ever proved that the Clintons did a single thing wrong. Bill
Clinton lied about a pathetic, squalid affair that was none of anyone
else's business anyway, and for that they impeached the man and
dragged this country through more than year of the most tawdry,
ridiculous, unnecessary pain. 

"The puzzle is where this depth of feeling comes from," mused the
ineffable Krauthammer. "Whence the anger? It begins of course with the
'stolen' election of 2000 and the perception of Bush's illegitimacy."
I'd say so myself, yes, it would. I was in Florida during that
chilling post-election fight and am fully persuaded to this good day
that Al Gore actually won Florida, not to mention getting 550,000 more
votes than Bush overall. 

The night Gore conceded the race in one of the most graceful and
honorable speeches I have ever heard, I was in a ballroom full of
Republican Party flacks who booed and jeered through every word of it.
One thing I acknowledge about the right is that they're much better
haters than liberals are. Your basic liberal is pretty much a
strikeout on the hatred front. Maybe further out on the left you can
hit some good righteous anger, but liberals, and I am one, are
generally real wusses. 

To tell the truth, I'm kind of proud of us for holding the grudge this
long. Normally, we'd remind ourselves that we have to be good sports,
it's for the good of the country, we must unite behind the only
president we've got, as Lyndon used to remind us. If there are still
some of us out here sulking, "Yeah, but they stole that election,"
well good. I don't think we should forget that. 

But, onward. So George Dubya becomes president having run as a
"compassionate conservative," and what do we get? Hell's own
conservative and zilch for compassion. His entire first eight months
was tax cuts for the rich, tax cuts for the rich, tax cuts for the
rich. Then came 9-11, and we all rallied. Country under attack, most
horrible thing, what can we do? Ready to give blood, get out of our
cars and ride bicycles, whatever. Shop, said the president. And more
tax cuts for the rich. 

By now, we're starting to notice Bush's bait-and-switch con. Make a
deal with Ted Kennedy to improve education, and then fail to put any
money into it. Promise $15 billion in new money to combat AIDS in
Africa (wow), but it turns out to be a cheap con -- no new money. Bush
comes to praise a job-training effort, then cuts the money. Bush says
AmeriCorps is great, then cuts the money. Gee, what could we possibly
have against this guy? 

Then suddenly, in the greatest bait and switch of all time, Osama bin
Laden doesn't matter at all, and we have to go after Saddam Hussein,
who had nothing to do with 9-11. But he does have horrible weapons of
mass destruction. So we take out Saddam Hussein, and there are no
weapons of mass destruction. Furthermore, the Iraqis are not overjoyed
to see us. By now, quite a few people who aren't even liberal are
starting to say, "Wha' the hey?" 

We got no Osama, we got no Saddam, we got no weapons of mass
destruction, the road map to peace in the Middle East is blown to
hell, we're stuck in this country for $87 billion just for one year,
and no one knows how long we'll be there. And still poor Krauthammer
is hard-put to conceive how anyone could conclude that George W. Bush
is a poor excuse for a president. 

It is not necessary to hate George W. Bush to think he's a bad
president. Grown-ups can do that, you know -- decide someone's
policies are a miserable failure without lying awake at night consumed
with hatred. Poor Bush is in way over his head, and the country is in
bad shape because of his stupid economic policies. If that make me a
Bush-hater, then sign me up. 

================================================