Fear and Loathing of George W. Bush

Some pictures of my trip to Kentucky forthcoming. In the meantime, Reb Bacchus at The Bar recently asked:

Frankly, I haven't seen any real partisan behavior by Bush. I'm not using hyperbole here, I'm being as honest as I can. Thus from my side, to see the charges and the emotion doesn't make sense. I would consider it a tremendous favor if you could try to explain it to me.

Here's my response:

I think there are a few different things contributing to the anti-Bush fervor. I'm not talking about specific actions Bush has taken or failed to take, except to say how people feel about them (and, parenthetically, how I feel), but about the emotional reasons so many people feel alienated by a self-proclaimed non-dividing uniter.

There are two key feelings here. Number one has several contributing causes. The 2000 election fight left a bitter taste in everyone's mouth. So did the high-profile right-wingers pursing Clinton so obsessively. (This is not the place to discuss weather their zeal was justified; I'm merely pointing out that they were quite ... motivated.)

In a more general sense, I think there is quite a bit of free-floating anger at some of the socially regressive policies that have gained ascendancy in the Republican Party in the last two decades. The only thing a lot of people find more repulsive than burning the American flag is an attempt to ban same. And to the huge number of people who see little difference between "Left Behind" and "Lord of the Rings," there is a constant fear of those who would make governmental decisions based on religious beliefs. (That last one's not new, as Benedict de Spinoza's 1670 essay "Theologico-Political Treatise" demonstrates, also see Robert Ingersoll's 1890 "God in the Constitution." Or the Jefferson-penned Act for Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia in 1785.)

In any case, this fear projects itself onto Bush. He is the leader of the Republicans, ergo, he must be the leader of the forces of social regressiveism. That's the first ism I've invented in months. It feels good. (The truth is just the opposite: Bush is in many ways a product of these forces. Sandy talked about self-interest as a political motivator. It's in Bush's interest to appease the social conservatives, who will reward him with what I'll call, tongue firmly in cheek, the Mel Gibson Vote.)

The second key feeling is the widespread belief that Bush has failed to respond correctly to September 11th. We all know the details, of course. People felt threatened after 9/11, felt unsafe. Emotionally, a lot of people respond to various things Bush has and hasn't done (overthrowing Saddam, failing to fund increased civil defense and border security) by projecting their feelings onto him. They feel (wrongly) that it's his fault for not protecting us on 9/11 and (rightly) that he isn't doing enough to try and protect us from future attacks.

So these two separate fears both project themselves onto the President. And a lot of people (myself included) share a concern about both issues, but regard neither as an all-consuming problem. But put them together, and you have a hatred that is hard to keep restrained by the iron jaws of logic. (For myself, I do my best, but can't help enjoying The Onion.)

Post a Comment