"I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system," Bush told CNN television, saying he had made the decision "to make sure the economy doesn't collapse."
This is perhaps the most oxymoronic statement I have ever heard. It's like saying, "I am abandoning Christian principles to save Christianity." It's like trying to save the hen house by sending in all the foxes. Isn't this kind of thinking the definition of insanity?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Dave, I went to the blog to post this idiotic statement, but you beat me to it. You are absolutely right. I rest my case against Bush. And I don't care what he's done in a war. I don't care if liberals hate him. I don't care if he's conquered the world and renamed it the United World of America. He's insane, or he's in idiot. A communist country is not worth saving or protecting. He is a disgraceful scoundrel of the highest water. He has done more than Obama, Ayers and all their communist pals to destroy this country. At a bare minimum, he has set the table for Obama. He's made Obama's job much easier. Words cannot capture the bitterness and resentment I feel toward this man.
It's too bad the President didn't get invited to the South American summit. He could have consulted with Hugo Chavez on techniques for nationalizing business and industry. Why not learn from the experts! Castro's little brother may even have offered some good ideas on collectivism.
Without arguing the merits of this particular statement (I am as nearly clueless about economics as it's possible to be), I will say that sometimes an apparent oxymoron can convey a larger truth. What I'm thinking of here is Churchill's statement during World War II defending extreme disinformation measures. As he put it: "Sometimes truth must be protected by a bodyguard of lies."
Having said that, though, doesn't the bailout of the auto industry totally undermine our entire system? Jim DeMint was right: there will be - or at least ought to be - riots around the country by workers who have lost their jobs due to a bad economy, only to find out that a favored class of workers is being rewarded. Where we're headed now, the competitive marketplace is meaningless; the industries with the biggest lobbyist payrolls will win government favor. It's truly the end of America as the world leader in innovation; economic vitality, and productivity; our biggest winners - which will therefore attract the smartest people - will be the schmoozers, gladhanders, backslappers and pocket liners.
These trends will be very, very very difficult to reverse. We're in for a long dark night.
And please indulge me for a moment while I cite another indicator that America is in full retreat from its leadership role: Drudge is linking to a story reporting that the Chinese are mounting an antipiracy fleet to patrol the waters off the Horn of Africa. Where in the hell is America?! We should be leading these kinds of efforts. It's a disgrace, a sad and shameful disgrace, that a police state is taking the lead in something like this. Free men ought to be the protectors and defenders of the freedom of the seas. This is a bad bad bad development.
President Bush was at the Army War College here in Carlisle yesterday, and a friend of mine who works there got to sit in on the two hour meeting. The first part was a formal speech on homeland security. Then, the press was ushered out and the President spoke to the students and spouses in an informal Q and A. My friend said that during this time Bush was a different man: relaxed, insightful, and extremely funny. One of the things he kept emphasizing was the importance of standing on principle. Giving his recent statement about abandoning free-market principles, I just had to scratch my head. I just can't figure him out. Has some sinister force "gotten to him"? Is he deceived, deranged? I don't think he's deranged. But I do think he has come under some powerful influences that have tricked him into believing he can make a car run by pouring grape juice into it. I would like to believe he is sincere but duped. My friend was very impressed with him in this venue. I wish we could see more of him this way. Rush has said before that Bush is a different person when the cameras are off and the setting is informal. Could it be that his high view of the presidency (how he should present himself publically) has actually inhibited his effectiveness as a national leader? Bush had the potential for greatness, but these last two years, and especially these last two months, have (in my opinion) left him with a severely tarnished legacy.
Gentlemen, let us keep our heads about us. Remember, Bill Clinton was the most charming guy, could just win you right over with the power of his personality. Hey, Hitler, too. I don't care if a guy is glib, tells a great joke, makes you feel like the only one in the room, etc., etc., etc. That has nothing to do with a man's character. "By their fruits ye shall know them." Actions speak louder than words. Bush has simply sold out, to the inside-the-beltway crowd, to the media, to "compassionate conservatism," to the "presidents' club" (after all, there have been only 43 of them, even fewer have been elected to the position). But does it even matter to whom or why? I don't need eight years to figure a man out, especially when he's one of the most visible people in the entire world. Heck, it didn't take me even four years. Bush broke so many promises, and betrayed conservatives so much, that I didn't even vote for him in 2004. You could substitute many other words or phrases for "free-market principles" in that stupid statement. How about conservatism? Is he also saving conservatism, too?
We all three of us judge leaders against Ronald Reagan. Take a look: How does Bush measure up? Answer: He doesn't. Did Reagan sacrifice our dearest principles in order to "save" them? He certainly did not. I don't need to chat with Bush to know he's a bum. If he's such a great guy, why is he ruining my country? Hmmmm? Unless you have a satisfactory answer to this question, I don't see how you can praise or admire this man.
Like Brian, I, too, worry when someone acts much differently with one crowd than he/she does with another.
Obviously, we all do this to an extent, but when it's such a marked switch, I become highly concerned.
I gravitate toward more of a "what you see is what you get" type of leader. At least then you know where he/she stands.
Angelique
OK, no more psychoanalysis of Mr. Bush. You're right, he has betrayed the values of his most ardent supporters. It doesn't really matter why. I agree with you, Angelique. I can deal far better with a person who is honest and real, even if I don't fully agree with him. Sadly, I think we are about to get a showman of the first order, who will make Clinton look like a third-rate circus act.
Post a Comment