Thursday, September 15, 2005
3 Cheers for George Bush the Liberal
George or Andy?
The Andy Griffithization of George W. Bush
I am not in the habit of saying complimentary things about our current president, but when it is warranted, I will freely give credit. Notwithstanding the opening paragraphs, the New Orleans speech is the best speech of his career. It is also his most liberal, certainly in terms of heart. And I suspect it will go a long way toward helping people understand the importance of liberality.
But here's the weird thing.
I think the president enjoyed being liberal. I also think David Brooks enjoys his newfound freedom. This speech represents a trimph of liberalism, if not Liberalism. And maybe that too. A liberal triumph benefits everyone. Since Bush needn't worry about re-election, he can be as liberal or magnanimous as his maturing soul might demand.
Here is another completely unscientific proof of his recent, and perhaps televised, evolution:
He resembled Andy Griffith.
Let me explain. While normally, Mister Bush will resemble Paul Wolfowitz, Pat Robertson or Karen Hughes, being a shape-shifter and all -- on tonight's performance, he, during his best moments, looked like Andy Griffith. The consummate liberal. And during his first presidential campaign, he sounded like Martin Luther King. I suspect he would watch or listen to these folks, on tape or in person, and then imitate, consciously or un-, that person.
I don't know if he actually met with, or studied, Andy Griffith. I like to think he didn't, and that, instead, he evolved into Andy Griffith, much like Walt Whitman was reputed to have evolved into cosmic consiousness.
Andy Griffith is who people want to see being the sheriff, or chief law dude, as the kids say.
A benevolent friend who uses his power to make life better for everyone.
May Bush become that benevolent friend who uses his power to make life better for everyone.
Everyone.
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
Robert Benchley Society announces winner
The Daily News Online
This winter, members of the Robert Benchley Society announced a writing contest that would be used to identify the second coming of the renowned 20th-century humorist. They believe they have found him in Kelso, Washington.
In May, the Society named Joe Daggy's essay, "When You Can't Sleep," the first-prize winner. Daggy spent Labor Day weekend in Boston, where he accepted the award. The essay will be published in Espree magazine.
Congratulations to Joe Daggy for a job well done.
This winter, members of the Robert Benchley Society announced a writing contest that would be used to identify the second coming of the renowned 20th-century humorist. They believe they have found him in Kelso, Washington.
In May, the Society named Joe Daggy's essay, "When You Can't Sleep," the first-prize winner. Daggy spent Labor Day weekend in Boston, where he accepted the award. The essay will be published in Espree magazine.
Congratulations to Joe Daggy for a job well done.
End of the Bush Era
The Bush Era is over. The sooner politicians in both parties realize that, the better for them -- and the country.
E.J. Dionne explains how and why the Bush era came to an end on September 2, 2005...
Excerpts:
And so the Bush Era ended definitively on Sept. 2, the day Bush first toured the Gulf Coast States after Hurricane Katrina. There was no magic moment with a bullhorn. The utter failure of federal relief efforts had by then penetrated the country's consciousness. Yesterday's resignation of FEMA Director Michael Brown put an exclamation point on the failure.
But the first intimations of the end of the Bush Era came months ago. The president's post-election fixation on privatizing part of Social Security showed how out of touch he was. The more Bush discussed this boutique idea cooked up in conservative think tanks and Wall Street imaginations, the less the public liked it. The situation in Iraq deteriorated. The glorious economy Bush kept touting turned out not to be glorious for many Americans. The Census Bureau's annual economic report, released in the midst of the Gulf disaster, found that an additional 4.1 million Americans had slipped into poverty between 2001 and 2004.
Promises! Promises!
Broken promises!
E.J. Dionne explains how and why the Bush era came to an end on September 2, 2005...
Excerpts:
And so the Bush Era ended definitively on Sept. 2, the day Bush first toured the Gulf Coast States after Hurricane Katrina. There was no magic moment with a bullhorn. The utter failure of federal relief efforts had by then penetrated the country's consciousness. Yesterday's resignation of FEMA Director Michael Brown put an exclamation point on the failure.
But the first intimations of the end of the Bush Era came months ago. The president's post-election fixation on privatizing part of Social Security showed how out of touch he was. The more Bush discussed this boutique idea cooked up in conservative think tanks and Wall Street imaginations, the less the public liked it. The situation in Iraq deteriorated. The glorious economy Bush kept touting turned out not to be glorious for many Americans. The Census Bureau's annual economic report, released in the midst of the Gulf disaster, found that an additional 4.1 million Americans had slipped into poverty between 2001 and 2004.
Promises! Promises!
Broken promises!
Monday, September 12, 2005
Sweet Neo-con (song by The Rolling Stones)
SWEET NEO CON
(M. Jagger/K. Richards)
You call yourself a Christian
I think that you're a hypocrite
You say you are a patriot
I think that you're a crock of sh*t
And listen now, the gasoline
I drink it every day
But it's getting very pricey
And who is going to pay
How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con.... Yeah
It's liberty for all
'Cause democracy's our style
Unless you are against us
Then it's prison without trial
But one thing that is certain
Life is good at Haliburton
If you're really so astute
You should invest at Brown & Root.... Yeah
How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con
If you turn out right
I'll eat my hat tonight
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah....
It's getting very scary
Yes, I'm frightened out of my wits
There's bombers in my bedroom
Yeah and it's giving me the sh*ts
We must have lots more bases
To protect us from our foes
Who needs these foolish friendships
We're going it alone
How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con
Where's the money gone
In the Pentagon
Yeah ha ha ha
Yeah, well, well
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah...
Neo con
(M. Jagger/K. Richards)
You call yourself a Christian
I think that you're a hypocrite
You say you are a patriot
I think that you're a crock of sh*t
And listen now, the gasoline
I drink it every day
But it's getting very pricey
And who is going to pay
How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con.... Yeah
It's liberty for all
'Cause democracy's our style
Unless you are against us
Then it's prison without trial
But one thing that is certain
Life is good at Haliburton
If you're really so astute
You should invest at Brown & Root.... Yeah
How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con
If you turn out right
I'll eat my hat tonight
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah....
It's getting very scary
Yes, I'm frightened out of my wits
There's bombers in my bedroom
Yeah and it's giving me the sh*ts
We must have lots more bases
To protect us from our foes
Who needs these foolish friendships
We're going it alone
How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con
Where's the money gone
In the Pentagon
Yeah ha ha ha
Yeah, well, well
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah...
Neo con
The Sunk-Cost Fallacy
Bush falls victim to a bad new argument for the Iraq war.
In recent speeches, President Bush has offered several reasons for staying the course in Iraq. One of them is the almost 2,000 Americans who have already died in the war. "We owe them something," the president said on Aug. 22. "We will finish the task that they gave their lives for."
Psychologists, decision scientists, and economists have a name for this type of argument: the "sunk-cost fallacy." It has gotten the United States into trouble once before. As casualties mounted in Vietnam in the 1960s, it became more and more difficult to withdraw, because war supporters insisted that withdrawal would cheapen the lives of those who had already sacrificed. We "owed" it to the dead and wounded to "stay the course." We could not let them "die in vain." What staying the course produced was perhaps 250,000 more dead and wounded. Read on...
In recent speeches, President Bush has offered several reasons for staying the course in Iraq. One of them is the almost 2,000 Americans who have already died in the war. "We owe them something," the president said on Aug. 22. "We will finish the task that they gave their lives for."
Psychologists, decision scientists, and economists have a name for this type of argument: the "sunk-cost fallacy." It has gotten the United States into trouble once before. As casualties mounted in Vietnam in the 1960s, it became more and more difficult to withdraw, because war supporters insisted that withdrawal would cheapen the lives of those who had already sacrificed. We "owed" it to the dead and wounded to "stay the course." We could not let them "die in vain." What staying the course produced was perhaps 250,000 more dead and wounded. Read on...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)