SIXTH COLUMN

"History is philosophy teaching by example." (Lord Bolingbroke)

New Email Address: 6thColumn@6thcolumnagainstjihad.com.

Thursday, October 06, 2005

Lyndon Baines Bush, the 43rd


I have finally lost all confidence in George W. Bush as President of the United States, and I have concluded that he is one of our weakest presidents. Many conservatives in their self-appointed roles as Bush's claque make every excuse possible for Bush, e.g., right wing talk radio, for one. However, all of these efforts are like painting over a grease spot. The paint adheres briefly then gives way to what it was trying to cover.

In fact, George W. Bush uncomfortably reminds me more and more of Lyndon Johnson. Obviously there are differences in style and principles, enough to be able to separate out each man from the other. Over time, I have come to see more and more parallels between the two men.

The only real strength I see in Bush is his dedication to his evangelical Christianism and his tenacious clinging to loyalty from and to his subordinates. In my view, this is why he appointed Harriet Miers to become a justice of the Supreme Court. She can keep her mouth shut about all the inner sanctum secrets, and she is an evangelical Christian. That's all, folks. As Ann Coulter put it correctly, there may be a small number of lawyers qualified even for consideration to the Supreme Court, and you can use their legal behaviors and legacies as data to judge their orientations and quality of thinking, including their willingness to uphold the Constitution. Ms Miers is not among these highly qualified persons.

George Bush refuses to fight the war with Islam to win. First off, he will not identify, thus know the nature of the enemy. With regard to religion, he is "stuck on stupid." In his most recent speech, just this morning, he proclaimed that all of these jihadists do not represent Islam because Islam is a great religion. Thus, we continue to grind up American service personnel and treasure to little avail because he will not identify the enemy and fight properly, in accordance with the correct identification.

He is fighting Iraq like Johnson fought the senseless war of Vietnam. ILike Vietnam, Iraq is a war of altruism, in which the leader perceives America's duty to be that of self-sacrificial service to the world, to right the wrongs while absorbing all of the costs, including the lives of American military youth. It reminds me of Don Quixote--only he was certifiable. Part of this altruism is to allow these Iraqi savages to choose a constitution that virtually guarantees that all of America's losses will have been in vain. They are being allowed to vote themselves into Sharia, and even if in diluted form now, Sharia and Islam will soon devour Iraq--you can make book on that.

Bush has blindness about borders that defies understanding. Take Iraq. Syria and Iran send men and materiel to chew up Americans and undo everything we have been doing since March 2003. Bush won't fight Congress for a proper Supreme Court nominee, and he won't fight Syria and Iran, nor will he put the screws to Saudi Arabia to stop supplying the slaughterers of Americans.

At home, Bush will not deal with illegal immigration. He is either pathologically blind about the border problem, or he is downright evil and is working some nefarious plan subrosa. Either way, he is working against America.

No one could ever accuse Bush of having a "vision thing," either Bush president. In fact, he seemed to have dialed out of his vigilance and duties for a long time now. The best illustration of how dialed out he has been came in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. He had no public involvement for days, which left Americans thinking that he might not have noticed the effects of Hurricane Katrina.

This projection of apparent uninvolvement by Bush is what is killing his poll numbers. People hate the war in Iraq because they sense Bush has put it on auto pilot and gone on mental vacation. Thus, in Iraq, we are fighting NOT TO WIN. Shades of Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam.

Domestically, Bush is a Democrat in drag, a sheep in Republican's clothing. Big spending and big government bother him not. When he leaves office, we might as well have had John Kerry and Al Gore, given the damage he will leave.

Therein lies the greatest tragedy. Which Democrat would be better than Bush? I will not hold my breath awaiting a reasonable answer, and Hilary Clinton is not the answer or any answer to anything. Which Republican would be better that Bush? It is a little too early to say, but the answer is not Captain Queeg McCain. As the King of the Hill might say about McCain, "He ain't right."

Right now, and for the rest of the Bush second term, we could only hope that fate would put Dick Cheney into the Oval Office. He has grit and does not suffer fools lightly. I think he would throw out all of those Islamic fifth columnists Rove and Norquist bring in to whisper in Bush's ears. I think he would switch the war machine from "muddle along" to "win and win it now." I think he would also tell Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and that corrupted ilk to follow the advice he gave to Senator Lahey. I am not sure, of course, but I think he might have been the far, far better choice for president over President Lyndon Baines Bush.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home