|
The “debate” on Bush
For a glimpse of the sub-brainless state of political debate in this country, see the comments following the New York Times article about President and Mrs. Bush having dinner at his twin brain’s Watergate apartment last night. Bush’s critics, sounding like neo-confederates talking about Lincoln, say Bush is a liar and a tyrant who destroyed the Constitution. Bush’s defenders have one mantra-like reply: he kept us safe, meaning that there have been no major terrorist attack in the U.S. since 9/11. That’s not nothing by any means, and I have consistently supported Bush regarding the Patriot Act, the telephone surveillance program, and other anti-terrorism measures. But when the absence of a major attack in the U.S. is the only thing to praise Bush for after eight years as president, and his supporters keep repeating it over and over and over, it reveals his nothingness, and theirs.
Also, it’s is not true that Bush’s policies kept us safe. There were various planned terrorist attacks by U.S. Muslims that were stopped not through Bush’s programs but through ordinary law enforcement and good luck. Email entry |