Ironically, Bush's own ineptitude during Katrina and in Iraq may have been more effective in deprogramming Americans than anything the left has intentionally done.
But the complicity goes further still and let's not fool ourselves. Democratic Senators, Reps and lobbies are entwined in this too. In order to block even-worse Republican candidates, we've been voting for Dems with big ties to bad money and who are no strangers to pork.
There are plenty of corporatist Dems that may oppose his message, but seek to preserve the structure of government that wrought Bush and his ilk. This is so they can replace the worst guys as the pendulum swings back with the slightly-less-worse guys. Money trumps a lot more than peace in Washington, it trumps integrity, stripping us all of freedom, liberty and justice.
The complicity goes further. I believe prominent Americans such as entertainers, authors, artists, musicians and athletes have a duty as people of prominence to use their influence for change, more so than others. Paul Newman and Robert Redford are brilliant examples.
I fully understand the tightrope walk of those whose livelihoods or careers would be jeopardized by becoming politically outspoken - many are beholden to contracts with publishers or record labels who cringe at the idea. But this is at the very core of the problem, keeping quiet for money. Particularly for musicians and artists, whose greatest creativity often goes hand in hand with great honesty.
Consumer products are complicit. From the movies you watch, to the music you listen to, to the food you eat, the fact that large companies decide who gets shelf space mean rabblerousers get canned, even after Michael Moore and George Clooney proved to Hollywood the public has a thirst for cage-rattling cinema.
Even former CIA head George Tenet's own book got "delayed" for government review - but literature is the primary bulwark against a corrupt regime (because they don't like to read books). They concentrate on the media of the less literate: tabloids and TV.
We can Bush-bash all day, (just look at what was posted on whitehouse.gov that day, it's all bad, all the time). But as awful as Bush is, he is still only a temp. The real disease facing us is the way DC politics work, with an election system that allows money to trump everything and with a merry-go-round of lobbyists and corporate stooges going in and out of Congressional office positions as if they were fantasy football trades.
We voted for drastic change and an end to the war and what did we get so far? A couple of non-binding, symbolic measures that couldn't even get past a minority filibuster. The idea of de-funding the war is still considered a "fringe" concept because no one wants to be seen as pulling support from the troops, even though it would be the President sending them to fight without bullets. Dems are afraid of the spin that will be put on it - "Dems de-fund Troops", instead of "Dems de-fund Bush".
How about they approve the war appropriation but impose benchmarks for Bush to show evidence of progress by making Iraqis take standardized tests? Just talking here.
Ridiculously, the Democratic majority is afraid that Americans won't understand the notion that Bush is the one keeping our troops in harm's way. Didn't Americans just overwhelmingly vote to end the war? Every exit poll and survey I've seen says so.
But the Dems stick to the war plan, afraid the military-industrial donors in their districts will pull campaign funds and local jobs out from under them. Again, the disease which Bush is just a symptom of. Money trumps peace.
U.S. defense contracts are the richest in the world by far, and are intentionally spread out across all 50 states so all politicians are "on board".
Politicians also band together to fight - against the people - for ethics reform, election finance reform, even lobbying reforms. If we can't look at these problems first, we'll just end up with a Democrat in the White House beholden to big donors, SIGs, PACs and lobbies instead of a Republican. This will make the pendulum swing back again.
Presidential campaigns drive big media in a big way, and as fun as it may be to handicap at home, passing campaign finance and lobbying reform would create a completely different breed of lawmaker - unbought. It costs $100 million to mount a presidential campaign nowadays, setting up a dynamic between government and media that both seek compliance from the voter.
The billions they raise every campaign season, including your contributions are spent mostly on the media - TV advertising accounting for the lion's share. With big networks profiting, they can gerrymander immensely, making or breaking candidates with changing levels of "news" coverage. The whole process stinks and should be targeted for fixing before any specific candidate is supported.
GW is a proud American from NY State, concerned about media manipulation and overconsumption. He believes in fiscal responsibility, small government and strict ethics. He recently changed careers to become an inner city schoolteacher. A firm proponent of international adoption and curbing overpopulation, he hopes to adopt a third child and enjoys history, "honest" music and art and obscure vinyl records.
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
