Decency and goodness would have already pardoned Ramos and Compean.
Bush is good and decent like Nixon was.
bump
Great article and sadly true. I will always hold President Bush in high esteem for the way and slander on his character. God bless you, sir.
Its excellent analysis
Christopher Booker's The Neophiliacs: A Study of the Revolution in English Life In The Fifties and Sixties was a very good examination of this phenomenon.
I don't the feeling that there is enough Bush to love or hate -- that he's substantial, that there's as much there to get worked up over. Maybe there was once, but now he's more of a ghost or an irrelevance than anything else. That very smallness or absence or irrelevance may be one thing that angers people, even those who agree with him about some important issues.
That is, the liberals impute to themselves only the highest motives, in a futile attempt to deny their own aggression, which they devalue and would shun. But the aggressive drive is no respector of libidinal objects and is characterized by a peremptory quality which overrides superego constraints.
Because he has suppressed awareness of his aggressive intentions, the liberal under threat is unable to manage or moderate his aggression as normal persons can, but rather sinks to the deepest hog-wallows of hostility and hate.
This embroiled narcissism is a remnant of the most infantile of dynamics, and the least susceptible to the influence of maturation.
George Bush is a target because simply put his integrity generates a narcissistic threat to the liberal's sense of superiority. All liberals instinctively know that whether he could parse a sentence or not, and his obvious blunders notwithstanding, he is still ten times the man they will ever be. This incites infantile narcissistic rage at the hypothalamic level of the ancient reptilian brain.
The fascinating truth of this can be seen in the almost eerie replay, the liberals' reaction to Sarah Palin. Their hatred of her is radioactive and exceeds even the Bush derangement syndrome.
As with Bush, she threatens every liberal by being integrated and fulfilled, and unforgivably, a woman to boot. She is the living ideal of all that feminism pretends to seek; thus her very existence exposes the leftist lie behind the women's "movement," as it evolved into the malignant force it came to be, and discredits the entire feminist project.
Happy New Year!
I'm not a Bush hater, but I don't respect him as a leader either, and it's precisely because there was a "realistic alternative" to the invasion of Iraq. What he needed to do was wait for events to develop, the quintessential conservative stance. Saddam very well may have blundered his was into provoking nearly the whole world into supporting action against him if Bush had waited a year or two. There was no rush, no emergency. Bush knew the WMD thing was mainly BS, as Paul Wolfowitz admitted years ago, but which many Bush supporters now conveniently forget.
Bush decided he had to act now because he thought he had to capitalize on 911 war fever. It was dissipating by 2003, but hadn't yet disappeared.
George Bush took us to war because he hated Saddam, and he mistakenly believed his family's hatred and the national interests of the United States of American were one and the same. It was a great, tragic mistake, and history will not forgive him for it.
R.I.P. / U.S.A.