GEORGE W. BUSH…THEN BARACK OBAMA…WTF?!

8 03 2009

Surely two more different people are hard to imagine. In fact I think they represent the two extremes of the American male personality: the good old boy and the analyzing intellectual.

Bush is — or more likely chose at some point in his life to act like — the classic Texas shit-kicker. I remember those guys well from growing up in Texas! They are strong and silent. But underneath that they are explosively emotional. They don’t know much about anything except business (which they often know a very great deal about indeed). When put in a tight spot they can be vindictive, even dangerous.

On the other side is a classic type from back east: articulate, elegant, widely-knowledgeable, and highly self-controlled. Many of our best technocrats are probably like this. And so are lots of people with Old Money (some of whom I met many years ago in college). Yet, through a delicious irony, Bush, having chosen to doff his inherited persona of Old — or  in his case Middle Aged — Money, has been succeeded in the highest office in the land by a man who comes from the lower middle class yet acts like a gentleman.

How could one People have elected two such different men in succession? I think the answer in the case of Bush is very clear. He was what a bunch of very scared and angry Americans called out for to save them. After being traumatized by the 9/11 attacks, we wanted someone tough to go somewhere, anywhere!, and whip some Arab ass. Bush, having chosen much earlier in his life to portray primitive American manhood, was just the man to embody our rage. He proceeded to act as ragefully as we could have wished, so we re-elected him in 2004.

Easy to understand.

But what about Obama, the cool, elegant, mixed-raced, smart guy? How could a country with a history of racism, and a streak of anti-intellectualism as wide as the Mississippi River, possibly have elected him President? I’m 61 years old, and the only time I remember our picking such a president in my lifetime was when Jack Kennedy (a Catholic, and therefor arguably unelectable at the time) was elected in 1960, whereupon his urbanity proceeded to charm the nation.

Needless to say, I have a theory about why Obama made it. Read my next post on this subject and see what you think about it.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

3 responses

15 03 2009
MagiMysteryTour

Obviously a typo, you’re surely aware that Kennedy was elected in 1960. By 1964 he was dead. More importantly, to know who killed him I urge you as strongly as I can to watch this video and the following 8 installments:

Bush was not re-elected in 2004. “Re-elected” implies that he was elected in 2000, which he was not. The 2000 election was rigged in Florida where the governor just happened to be somewhat personally related to George W. Bush. Coincidence? Oh yeah, sure, complete coincidence!

What you have to understand about the “9/11” attack, no matter how much you feel the need to deny the notion, is that Bush is the one who arranged that attack, deliberately to be able to manipulate the population particularly by putting the society in a state of panic and fear, in which they do not think clearly but react in collective fear. Bush’s kick-ass John Wayne/Rambo attitude was not a fortuitous coincidence at that moment of history, it was all clearly planned to work that way so this country would be putty in his hands. Which it was. Those very dirty, bloody hands.

15 03 2009
nightman1

OMG, I’m so embarrassed! I was actually in the world when Kennedy was elected, unlike a large percentage of our population today, and I got it wrong anyway! Thank you very much for the correction.

I am unable to believe that Bush would kill three thousand Americans simply to gain an advantage, Cheney is more likely. Still, both those guys clearly had a righteous sense of all the good they were able to do for the American people. Even they might have been unable to sustain that view of themselves if they had done such a thing.

Besides, we saw the planes hit the towers. I doubt that Bush and/or Chaney could have arranged to take control of and destroy two planes, let alone recruit the suicidal pilots necessary to perform such a mission. And they would have absolutely had to know the times of striking of the planes in advance, in order to set and then set off the demolition explosions.

The Florida stuff in 2000 is another story. We actually saw the main acts of manipulation happen–a Republican mob intimidating the ballot recounters, and then that phony Supreme Court decision giving the election to Bush.

There is not much Republicans will not do to win. We’ve all watched them stop at nothing ever since their use of the racist Willie Horton commercial against Michael Dukakis back in [a year I can’t remember]. I believe they are like this because unfettered free enterprise is their faith, because it is powerfully supported by our foundational myth–the “American Dream”, and because they are very intense about keeping every dollar of their wealth. I recall reading that the Rich, during the Depression, subjected Franklin D. Roosevelt to an unrelenting barrage of vituperation. They called him a communist, even a fascist, while he was saving their bacon for them.

But I am going now to look at the YouTube vid that you have provided the url for. It’s possible I might see some evidence I hadn’t expected.

15 03 2009
nightman1

Oh, I see your first video is about the plot behind the Kennedy assassination. There is a book out now [whose title I, naturally, can’t remember] whose central idea is that a conspiracy of the CIA and/or the Military arranged to have Kennedty killed because he was not as fanatic a Cold Warrior as they were.

Makes sense to me. As a now-old person, I was there all through the years of the Cold War. The government kept us constantly terrified of the Russians, and for most Americans it was a holy crusade to destroy them. (We always fall in love with HOLY crusades in the Christian USA.)

Gore Vidal says that immediately after World War II the Russians were more or less content to have the US be ahead of them in military technology–knowing how much it would distort their non-thriving economy to keep up. And, after all, the USSR had been our ally during World War II. Vidal say that the USA acted as the initial “aggressor” in the Cold War, by developing the hydrogen bomb and by intentionally getting the military-industrial complex going (Lots of $$ to be made there!) I think Vidal also believes that we started the Cold War because our leaders and elites were not willing to see any part of the world be unsafe for capitalism. Vidal, who is now in his 80s, was very much “there” in the late 1940s and 1950s. He had access to high Washington society because of his origin therein, and he is a VERY smart and observant person.

Now, having enjoyed the special joy of opining heavily, I will go look at those videos you recommend!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: