Friday, November 14, 2008

Hating George Bush

One of my most respectful commenters tends to see my posts through the lens of "Bush Hatred." It's a convenient deflection.

Similar to the unmentioned and evidently forgotten Clinton Hatred, the concept of Bush Hatred (that conniest of neo-cons, my fellow M.D. Charles Krauthammer, coined the term "Bush Derangement Syndrome" [in fairness to me and my fellow physicians, Krauthammer is a former psychiatrist, which subset of medical doctors I've always considered a waste of a good education [[in fairness to psychiatrists, not all of them are as idiotic as Krauthammer, nor do I mean to disrespect the profession: only to say it hardly requires a medical degree]]]) misses the point entirely -- as does, for that matter and most of the time, the commenter to whom I refer.

Just as there were on the right people who so hated Bill Clinton that they couldn't credit him with a single positive thing, so there are on the left a few (present blogger excepted) who are so enraged by George Bush that they are blind to his accomplishments.

Or would be, if he had any.

What I hate about George Bush is not the man (although it gets pretty damn hard to take when the President of the US constantly embarrasses us all) but what he's done. My wise commenter suggests that "if libs proclaimed their disdain for people who would harm this country as loudly as they proclaim their disdain for the current president, maybe they wouldn't sound so "unpatriotic." " He (I assume it's a he, because the women I know [I'm speaking personal knowledge, now, as opposed to one I've seen of late on TV] are pretty rational thinkers) couldn't be more wrong. The tragedy, the disgrace of George Bush is exactly that in every way, he's aided and abetted those who would harm this country. Because of his shallow and incompetently executed policies, wherever you look you see our enemies stronger than they were. It's precisely BECAUSE we dastardly liberals understand the danger to our country posed by those who wish us ill that we are angry at George Bush.

You name it: our economy is faltering, our military is weakened, the invasion recruited more terrorists than it eliminated, Iran is stronger, al Queda is safely ensconced in Pakistan, North Korea has bombs, peace is further away from Israel and Palestine, we are more hated and less respected around the world: in short, I can see only damage to our interests inflicted upon us by George Bush. His "war on terror" is, in addition to being stupidly named and constitutionally abused, nearly entirely ill-conceived;* it has accomplished the exact opposite of what was (presumably) intended (other than to have enriched certain pro-Bush members of the plutocracy). (Not wishing to sound too conspiratorial, I'll allow the possibility that that was not the primary intent.)

It's the unswayable Bush lovers that represent the real danger. In passing off all disagreement as "Bush Hatred," and in claiming falsely that liberals don't understand that we have enemies, people like my commenter willfully ignore the real reasons behind the criticisms and make correcting the mistakes harder. You can't eradicate terrorists with invading armies. You can't recruit help in finding them when you piss off the entire world. You don't make the country safer when you disregard the vulnerabilities on its own soil, nor when you bankrupt it to the point of being unable to fix them. When you round up people and torture them and hold them without charges, you not only get inaccurate information, you degrade your ability to try them in a respectable court of law (assuming you believe in such a thing) and rob us of our ability to demand lawful behavior in others. When you spend trillions on an unnecessary war that in no way plugs our weak spots but in fact increases them while killing our own and tens of thousands of others, you damage yourself more than our enemies could have -- and did -- in their wildest seventy-seven-virgin-dreams in their deepest caves. That, I'd say, is reason enough to believe George Bush has been a disaster for our country, and a boon to our enemies.

We all agree there are dangers and dangerous people out there. Where we disagree is in what are effective responses.

To buy the simple-minded idea that "liberals" love our enemies and hate our country is only to exacerbate and catalyze the destruction wrought by George Bush: by reducing the argument to absurdity while ignoring the issues, it -- as did he -- plays right into the hands of those who wish us ill.

*[I happen to agree that domestic surveillance and world-wide intelligence-gathering are an integral part -- the main part, in fact -- of fighting terrorism. Republicans laughed it off, of course, when John Kerry said as much in 2004; but, in fact, to the extent that we are safer since 9/11, it's due to the increased security (such as it is) at airports, and to the plotters (the ones that were actually real) that were uncovered by surveillance (mostly in and by other countries). On the other hand, there's no reason why such surveillance can't be done within the law, a concept evidently foreign to George Bush.]


  1. I hate George Bush. I spit at him every time I see his picture. And send him a Gypsy Curse.

    I don't hate many people, but I hate George Bush.

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. Hey Sid, still censoring the Comments I see, must be nice to have that much time on your hands, Just Jerkin your chain Sid! Lighten Up!!! OK I'll admit, "W" is an IDIOT, couldn't spell "CAT" if you spotted him the "C" and the "A", maybe if you guys had nominated someone half-way normal in 00' or 04' you'd have won. But it took a REPUBLICAN to get "No Child Left Behind" and that Rx Drug Plan, 8 years of Clinton-Gore and my Parents were still beggin for Lovastatin samples. Now when they get Diabetes from that Government backed Crestor, they won't have to pay for the Government backed Januvia, until they get to the "Donut Hole" and then its back to beggin me for samples..And what about "No Child Left Behind"?? I know, it'll be repealed as soon as that embarassing Ted Kennedy dies, the Obamas won't be using Public Schools anyway, so whats the fuss? And last but not least, We DO share an abiding disgust at Psychiatrists. You might enjoy my Drackie-winning post "Why I hate Psychiatrists" from July 10,2008, and "Frankie on the Couch" from October 30, 2008.

    Frank Drackman

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. OK Ellen, I know the chance's of this seein the Light of Day are about the same as seein Barak's Harvard Transcripts...Slim-Shady to None, but You're provin my point about Public Ed-ja-ma-cation, I gave up counting your grammatical errors with "Whom", and English isn't even my first language!! OH the TEACHERS don't like it, next thing You'll be Asking Dick Cheney about Alternative Energy Sources. Sure, you so-called Lib-er-als talk a good game, Gay-Porn in the Kindergarten, blah-blah-blah, but you pick over the responses to your own blog like you're friggin Joseph Goebbels. Don't want your embarassing remarks goin round the world? Think before you post,

    Shalom, Frank Drackman

  6. I published one, so I published the other. But I think the best place for you two to continue the personal one-on-ones (I welcome your comments when they're about my posts) is over at Frankie's place, where the fires are a-burnin' and the smoke is thick.


Comments back, moderated. Preference given for those who stay on topic.

Popular posts