The Case for George W. Bush i.e. what if he's right?

Esquire Magazine ^ | Aug 01 '04 | Tom Junod

[oldtimer2]

Esquire does not allow any posting of its content. Here is a link to the article, which is from a "liberal" author in a "liberal" magazine. His conclusions will surprise all Freepers.

[luv2ski]

Great article! It is continually surprising to me that 9-11 created a new political animal- a very liberal on social issues but very conservative on security voter. Several of these individuals are pretty high profile. For example: Dennis Miller, Ron Silver and this author. It's encouraging to see that there are a few liberals out there who get it and are not afraid to speak.

[tkathy]

While Bush has been courageously fighting the WOT (The War on Terror) the dims have been fighting the WOB (The War on Bush).

[nathanbedford]

This author nails it.

One phrase lept out at me, "If we get hit again and hit big" there can be no telling what will become of our democracy.

I fear that the author's tacit assumptions that Bush will lose and we will be hit again and hit big, are dreadful but likely to be bourne out. At that time it will be small comfort that Bush was vindicated.

[marblehead17]

ping

[Tribune7]

Good article. It's nice to see reality start to slowly dawn on a yuppie. The writer's not there yet but he's starting to dimly get it.

[CharlesThe Hammer]

This article gives me renewed hope that there must still be loyal and reasonable citizens amongst the Democrats. The tone the writer invokes is rightly serious and reflective. He honestly admits his tendency to dismiss President Bush yet has the moral integrity to question his own bias. It is this precise quality required for our republic to "survive" the nihilistic dervishes bent on our destruction. "What if Bush is right?", he writes. I offer the following excerpt from T.S. Eliot's, "The Hollow Men", as the choice offered to us by the dissemblers, equivocators and priests of expediency:"...
Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow
For Thine is the Kingdom
Between the conception
And the creation
Between the emotion
And the response
Falls the Shadow
Life is very long
Between the desire
And the spasm
Between the potency
And the existence
Between the essence
And the descent
Falls the Shadow
For Thine is the Kingdom
For Thine is
Life is
For Thine is the
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper."

[WOSG]

"he [Bush] operates out of the moral certainty that terrorists are the bad guys and need to be defeated"

Yup, he gets it ... and despite his misinformed views on Iraq, he almost gets that too.... I think of "Cold Harbor" and the day 7000 union men died in 30 minutes of a useless charge. US Grant had a choice. Every other Union general before defeated in battle retreated back across the river. Some, like McClellan, were so afraid of losing they never risked enough to win a battle. Others were simply outmatched by Lee's tactics. Grant, though, was made of different stuff. He knew he couldnt win without suffering losses or taking the fight to the enemy. Grant, in the face of that defeat at Cold Harbor, ordered his men to march - SOUTH. The energy in the battle lines when the order came down was electric; they would stay on offense! And at that moment, Robt E Lee knew he was facing the man who could lick him.

G W BUSH IS THE US GRANT OF OUR TIME. MISTAKES OR BRILLIANT STRATEGY, HE CAN WIN THIS FIGHT. HE WILL DEFEAT TERRORISM. THE DEMOCRATS CANNOT.

Hence my tagline: George W Bush - Right for our Times!

[WOSG]

Yup. those are the 'allies' that cravenly capitulate to terrorists. we cant defeat terrorism by adopting their strategies.

[WOSG]

A good read is John C. Waugh's "Reelecting Lincoln - The Battle For the 1864 Presidency". Many parallels between then and now.

You are so right! See my previous post on "Cold Harbor". Lincoln said they could run a war Democrat on a peace platform or a peace Democrat on a war platform and it wouldnt make a bit of difference... so apt for today as well. It really doesnt matter what Kerry and the platform say - they've said anything and everything for political expediency, and will continue that when in office. THAT'S NO WAY TO WIN A WAR.

[tet68]

We are going to be hit big no matter who is our next President.

I particularly liked this part.

If we do not find it within ourselves to identify the terrorism inspired by radical Islam as an unequivocal evil—and to pronounce ourselves morally superior to it—then we have lost the ability to identify any evil at all, and our democracy is not only diminished, it dissolves into the meaninglessness of privilege.

The problem for the liberals is they failed to pronounce themselves morally superiour to Bill Clinton and now can no longer identify the evil within their own party.

[Servant of the 9]

I found Clinton repulsive and embarrassing, and I could hardly wait for him to go away, but I never hated him; but liberals genuinely hate George Bush.

Clinton isn't big enough to hate.
He has to settle for contempt.
I can't imagine anyone wanting to punch out Bubba.
I can't imagine anyone not wanting to slap him.

It takes a big figure to draw real hate and fear.

So9

[Servant of the 9]

PING

So9

[Rebelbase]

Thanks for posting that. I've skimmed it, printed it and have put it in the bathroom. I find I'm much more focused there for the lengthy stuff in print and it cuts down on my magazine purchases too.

Thanks again.

[gilliam]

Too much information

[TalBlack]

His "conclusions" didn't surprise me.

The writer is simply a lying liberal who suspects the truth and wants credit for being thoughtful enough to look at the "other" side as he goes on to trash the "other" side.
HE WRITES:

"I am not comparing George W. Bush to Abraham Lincoln. The latter was his own lawyer as well as his own writer, and he was alive to the possibilities of tragedy and comedy—he was human —in a way that our president doesn't seem to be."

The above is only one and perhaps the least of the vicious shots he takes at Bush. This jackoff wants to have his cake and eat it too.

He makes the case for his side being wrong as he refuses to accept it. He smells defeat and wants some plausible deniability. This makes him one degree more honest than a garden variety Liberal--but ONLY one degree.

[nathanbedford]

"The problem for the liberals is they failed to pronounce themselves morally superiour to Bill Clinton and now can no longer identify the evil within their own party."

You know, that is a very good point.

At the time of the Clinton disgrace, I suppose we all instinctively understood that condoning his crimes could only lead the American commonowealth to grief. At the time I tended to relate to the abortion issue.

But your insight uncovers the fact that the Democrats, in their moral blindless, now constitute a physical danger to us all. The party has so confounded itself in its depravity that it interferes with our capacity to identify and repell an existential threat.

[tet68]

Girl you need to read this!
I await your insight!

[wingnutx]

That is awesome. This makes me very happy.

[livius]

I can't imagine anyone wanting to punch out Bubba. I can't imagine anyone not wanting to slap him.

Great way of putting it! In fact, I think you've summed it up - he wasn't big enough to hate, he was just embarrassing, unsavory, but not really substantial enough to hate.