President Bush as an agent of God: God’s aides never wrong (Whinney Liberal

I’m struck by how much is written, not about the policies and actions of the nation, but about the president, George W. Bush.

That should not be surprising. More and more, we’ve seen the rise of the "imperial presidency." In this administration, where the party of the president exercises unrestrained control of Congress and the Supreme Court, ever more power is concentrated in the one man who heads that administration.

There’s something more — something I don’t associate with an American presidency, or with the leadership of a democracy. That’s the personalization of government’s actions and policies. This president talks in terms of "I" and "me." Where one would expect him to say "this country," "United States policy" or even "we," he’s given to phrases, like "I’m running out of patience" and "I’m giving Saddam one more chance."

Such language is usually reserved for emperors and popes. It’s called the "imperial we." I remember, in the Dominican Republic, the president was given to such excessive displays as the billboard at the capitol’s airport greeting visitors with his picture and the words, "Trujillo Y Dios", (notice whose name came first). But that was a democracy in name only.

Perhaps Mr. Bush should use such terms. Despite published polls which sometimes raise the perception of his popularity, his policies are very much his own.

The president, elected to office by a minority of popular vote (among those who did bother to vote), following an issueless campaign in which he described himself as a "compassionate conservative;" selected by one swing vote on the Supreme Court, turned out to be a genuine radical — defined by Merriam Webster Dictionary as " marked by a considerable departure from the usual or traditional; b: tending or disposed to make extreme changes in existing views, habits, conditions, or institutions; c: of, relating to, or constituting a political group associated with views, practices, and policies of extreme change; d: advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs, as ‘the radical right.’"

One would have expected that the Bush regime and the president would have dropped sharply in the polls, as his government changed the definition of science, tossed aside centuries of international diplomacy, treated civil rights as an inefficient drag on an ever- increasing "big government," scorned the environment, protected multinational corporations at the expense of workers and investors, redistributed wealth that could have (should have) met the needs of the people for schools, medical care, infrastructure, roads, bridges, tax reduction for state and local governments and started a war for questionable reasons.

What sustains his personal popularity, I believe, is that he presents a character of complete assurance and sincerity. Even as his policies and actions contradict his words, he really believes what he says. He knows he’s right. He has no need to consider the opinion of others if it does not agree. He checks with his God every morning. There’s no need to listen to public opinion, world opinion or expert opinion that says he might be wrong. To a person convinced he’s acting for God, there’s no need for a second opinion.

You want to trust a man who’s really sure of himself, especially in times of fear and crisis. A guy who prays regularly can’t be all bad.

Unfortunately, that also describes, Torquemada of the Spanish Inquisition, Osama bin Laden and lots of other religious fanatics who were never wrong.

We should thank George Bush for showing us how dangerous it is to turn the government of a democracy over to a fundamentalist religious absolutist and remember that lesson at the next presidential election.

Harold Brohinsky is a noted area civil-rights advocate and self-proclaimed "unreconstructed, unrepentant, Eleanor Roosevelt, New Deal Democrat." He lives in Plattsburgh. He can be reached by e-mail: hbrohinsky@msn.com

You have to give this classic liberal credit on one count...at least HE is honest enough to admit the real source of hatred for President Bush...that he dares to admit to genuine faith in the one true God. Afterall, hatred for God is the bottomline motivating force behind liberalism/socialism..."Man is the measure of all things", and they would sooner cause the destruction of this greatest experiment in freedom in human history than admit that the success of this country was based on Christian principles, and it began to falter only when we strayed from that solid foundation.

At least this joker can admit the root cause for the stream of excuses the liberals offer to hate a president who threatens to try and restore this nation to it's former foundation, despite the terroristic attacks of liberals such as this author delivers in this piece.

Donating to the FreeRepublic will keep the bright beacon
of Freedom shining so that our Troops
and the world will know we stand with them.

Please join us.

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD-
It is in the breaking news sidebar!

I've never heard Bush say "I" ... he said "The United States will lead a coalition....."

And this guy says Bush can have his way because of a republican congress. Has he ever heard of Estrada?

That's exactly right: when someone knows he's right, there *is* no need to consult public, world or expert opinion. That was what was wrong with the prior "regime": everything, right and wrong included, was subjected to opinion polls. Thus, the junk science of Kyoto; the submission of national sovereignty to a UN made up mostly of tyrannical police states and their advocates; crushing, burdensome environmental regulations; and the coddling of Saddam Hussein and Kim of N.Korea. With policies like these facing GWB coming in, naturally the reversal of these to more reasonable, moderate policies will seem "radical".

Harold Brohinsky is a noted area civil-rights advocate and self-proclaimed "unreconstructed, unrepentant, Eleanor Roosevelt, New Deal Democrat."

In other words, "I'm a bleeding heart, pinko Democrat from the Jurassic Era".

"tossed aside centuries of international diplomacy"

Now, there's a load of hogwash for you. These guys are a bunch of malcontents; communists who long for total control as long as its they who "are in control". Leftists tend to exaggerate when they think they can get away with it. Socialism truly is a disease. I think he means "centuries of failed international diplomacy." The turd must be totally ignorant of the great "failures" of international diplomacy that occurred in the 20th century, like WWI and WWII, and some of the key figures that engineered those failures - like Neville Chamberlain, the prototype appeaser - and like none other than Mr. Brohinsky's hero, Bill The Rat Clinton, who's utter incompetance in foreign affairs has greatly contributed to the problems in the Middle East and North Korea. Its the appeasers like Jimmy (Every little Dictator's Favorite Butt Boy) Carter who resort to diplomacy with madmen that always ends up getting good men and women killed - undoing the damage.

I've never heard Bush say "I"

I wonder if this guy was upset that Clinton didn't say

"We never had sex with that woman"

Harold Brohinsky is a noted area civil-rights advocate and self-proclaimed "unreconstructed, unrepentant, Eleanor Roosevelt, New Deal Democrat."

So he probably, like, thinks he's right and stuff.

Anti-God whine.
Not my President whine.
Bush is a dictator whine.
Lame comparison of Bush to a facist whine.
Bush is popular, but nobody I know likes him whine.
Combined Bush was selected by the radical right wing whine.
Bush regime whine.
Bush is a religious fanatic whine.
Can't trust Bush whine.
Bush = Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt(FUD) whine.

</whiney lieberal translator off>

Any bets to the contrary - that this whiney lieberal sounds just like the teachers in the Snoopy cartoons on TV?

Harold Brohinsky is a noted area civil-rights advocate and self-proclaimed "unreconstructed, unrepentant, Eleanor Roosevelt, New Deal Democrat."

So he probably, like, thinks he's right and stuff.

I am sure,

But what does this guy want? Leaders who are not confindent, sincere or unsure of their positions? Plus he claims he is an "unreconstructed, unrepentant, Eleanor Roosevelt, New Deal Democrat." but according to him if (god help us) he was ever in a position of power if national or international public opinion was opposite of his beliefs he would have to "Repent" and pass laws and/or implement policies that go against his beliefs.

Which is bogus, I bet he is still upset the Clinton's failed at socializing medicine even though the vast majority of people were against it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.