Tuesday, June 21, 2005
Paging Ward Cleaver...
Not so long ago everything seemed, although far from perfect, at least hopeful. I'm speaking, of course, of the few months leading up to November 2, 2004. It's a continuing source of pain that things didn't turn out as they seemed to be about to. Indeed, they're even worse. I'm beginning to think I will never understand the extent to which so many people have put their trust in BushCo. (Many of them don't merely trust the misAdministration; they stridently insist that we all should do likewise.)
I was brooding about all this when I remembered a piece I wrote in August, 2004. While, yes, it's "dated" -- we know how things turned out -- in some ways it's quite timely. It's reproduced here, and I'll follow it up with a couple more comments.
Remember Eddie Haskell?
On the old "Leave It to Beaver" sitcom, Eddie Haskell was the teenage Wally Cleaver's unctuous friend: privately, a sneak and a mean-spirited prankster; with adults, a picture of perfect manners. It was "Wallace this" and "Yes, Mr. Cleaver" that and "Why, no, Mrs. Cleaver" the other thing. Not fooled at all, adults rolled their eyes and smiled wryly whenever Eddie turned his back. Even Wally didn't trust him.
Sometimes nowadays I feel like I've awakened in the Cleaver household. No, I don't mean in my own home. I mean here in America -- an America weirdly bereft of adults. An America governed by Eddie Haskell.
I've heard the arguments; no need to remind me of them. September 11 shocked my sense of being an American, just as it did yours. Iraq and the safety of our troops are never far from my mind. I've heard and read all about John Kerry and Vietnam, thank you.
But I simply cannot connect with -- can scarcely credit the existence of -- American voters who fully intend to vote for George W. Bush in November. Don't these people see him for what he is?
Don't misunderstand me. "These people" include friends, colleagues, and well-loved family members (as well as strangers -- allegedly nearly half [2005-06-21: Ouch!] of the country's voters). In a personal or professional dilemma, I'd trust and seek advice from any of them. They're decent. They have hearts. They're smart.
Yet not one can point to a single accomplishment of Bush's first four years untainted by lying, ill will, hypocrisy, corruption, sometimes outright stupidity -- sometimes all at once.
Not coincidentally, you'll notice the GOP's approach to campaigning consists only of empty sloganeering and (debatable) criticism of Kerry; they dismiss every argument with code words like "liberal," rather than counter-arguments. Why would this be? Because they can't run on their record.
Consider Bush's thrilling assertion, immediately after 9/11, that Osama bin Laden had nowhere to hide, that "we're going to get him" ("dead or alive," remember?); followed, six months later, by an admission that "I don't know where [bin Laden] is... I truly am not that concerned about him."
Consider the vaunted economic "recovery." Yes, we added "37,000 new jobs" last month. Unfortunately, we must add 140,000 new jobs every month just to keep pace with all the new people -- high school and college graduates, legal immigrants, and of course those laid off from their previous jobs -- entering the job market.
Consider the federal budget. It's like a wood-burning stove: When the temperature drops, you add a log. But under Bush administration policies, you must also toss in all your furniture, the clothes in the dressers and closets, the food in the pantry and fridge. (Don't forget to burn your cash and checkbook.) Whoops, wait -- save your best stuff (like your walls and roof). You need to truck it across town and dump it (meekly, so as not to disturb their sleep) into the woodpiles of the ten wealthiest people and five biggest companies in town.
Consider education. If I hear the president tout the "No Child Left Behind" initiative just one more time, I fear I will waken the neighborhood with screams. "His" initiative, sure. But when it came time to pay for it? Whoops, no money! (That's what"unfunded mandate" means. Promise us the moon; pay for nothing. Then repeat to us, daily if possible, the word "moon" -- we apparently need to remember that part.)
Consider the environment. Polls consistently show that Americans worry about the quality of our air, water, forests. The administration's solution? Give high-sounding names like "Clear Skies" and"Healthy Forests Initiative" to policies which actually relax the regulation of polluters and despoilers.
Before you dismiss all this as "Bush-hating": no, I don't hate the guy. I don't wish him injury. But you don't have to hate a president to recognize he has done nothing measurable for you and your neighbors -- especially when he continuously trumpets the latest slogan like it heralds a victory of some sort. (On the other hand, you haven't heard "Mission Accomplished" from his camp for quite a few months, have you?)
We've all known people like this -- a dreadful boss, say: the guy who says one thing but does another; the guy who bobs and weaves when put on the spot, except that he doesn't allow himself, ever, to be put on the spot in the first place (well, unless he's well-rehearsed and/or has a knowledgeable aide within prompting distance); the guy who blunders into the most desperate situations, dragging everyone else with him, and will not apologize, reconsider, even think because, y'know, he just flat-out knows what's right. (As this one reassured us in a press conference a few months ago, he cannot recall a single mistake he's made since January 20, 2001.)
Nobody admires such a boss, even if he's allegedly "a nice guy." No one with any sense of integrity and self-respect says, with a straight face, Him! Let me report to him!
So why are so many people willing to follow this failure off a cliff -- indeed, arguing strenuously for the privilege?
Honest, I'm not going to argue with you if you want to vote for Mr. Bush. I really hope you don't, but what happens when you go into the voting booth is for you and your conscience (and maybe, this year, the Diebold folks) to work out.
But I beseech you: Do some homework first on the guy you're voting for. Watch something other than Fox News for your information. Better yet, read something. Visit Web sites like misleader.org and mediamatters.org, and ask yourself why such abundantly documented charges aren't being refuted by those charged. (Maybe they're irrefutable?)
If you help grant this incumbent another term, just don't look in the mirror four years down the road and kid yourselves, Mr. and Mrs. Cleaver, that you didn't know any better: "Gee, but he said all the right things, didn't he?"
Why I bring this up again was a post I found yesterday on some blog, somewhere. It was written by an active serviceman as an open letter to (if I recall) lefties, liberals, and Democrats, and it was posted sometime within the last few days. [If anyone out there happens to know where it appeared, let me know and I'll include the link here. I haven't found it via Technorati or Google.] The thrust of its anguish was: "Don't you realize you are hurting us, your troops? Don't you realize you're helping to motivate a dangerous enemy? How can you do this to us?!?"
Listen: There are undoubtedly loopy individuals on the left who, having thought about it, have decided that yes, nothing would give them greater pleasure (regrettable pleasure, to be sure) than lots of US casualties in Iraq, Afghanistan, wherever. These individuals possibly hold the seriously deranged opinion that nothing short of lots of casualties can trigger The Revolution (whatever they mean by that) and bring down The Man (whomever they mean by that -- an individual or an institution).
But speaking as I am from inside the perceived liberal monolith, I assure you that we are on your side.
The point is:
In short, the question about the various messes which Americans find themselves in is not "How in the world can liberals do this to us?" The question is -- as it has been for over four years -- "How in the world can you, O bemoaner of liberals, let all this real shit be done to you?"
Jeezus. Even the Beav, young and innocent and goofy though he was, recognized an Eddie Haskell when he saw one. What the hell is wrong with your eyesight? Who told you to check your self-respect at the door?
I was brooding about all this when I remembered a piece I wrote in August, 2004. While, yes, it's "dated" -- we know how things turned out -- in some ways it's quite timely. It's reproduced here, and I'll follow it up with a couple more comments.
Remember Eddie Haskell?
On the old "Leave It to Beaver" sitcom, Eddie Haskell was the teenage Wally Cleaver's unctuous friend: privately, a sneak and a mean-spirited prankster; with adults, a picture of perfect manners. It was "Wallace this" and "Yes, Mr. Cleaver" that and "Why, no, Mrs. Cleaver" the other thing. Not fooled at all, adults rolled their eyes and smiled wryly whenever Eddie turned his back. Even Wally didn't trust him.
Sometimes nowadays I feel like I've awakened in the Cleaver household. No, I don't mean in my own home. I mean here in America -- an America weirdly bereft of adults. An America governed by Eddie Haskell.
I've heard the arguments; no need to remind me of them. September 11 shocked my sense of being an American, just as it did yours. Iraq and the safety of our troops are never far from my mind. I've heard and read all about John Kerry and Vietnam, thank you.
But I simply cannot connect with -- can scarcely credit the existence of -- American voters who fully intend to vote for George W. Bush in November. Don't these people see him for what he is?
Don't misunderstand me. "These people" include friends, colleagues, and well-loved family members (as well as strangers -- allegedly nearly half [2005-06-21: Ouch!] of the country's voters). In a personal or professional dilemma, I'd trust and seek advice from any of them. They're decent. They have hearts. They're smart.
Yet not one can point to a single accomplishment of Bush's first four years untainted by lying, ill will, hypocrisy, corruption, sometimes outright stupidity -- sometimes all at once.
Not coincidentally, you'll notice the GOP's approach to campaigning consists only of empty sloganeering and (debatable) criticism of Kerry; they dismiss every argument with code words like "liberal," rather than counter-arguments. Why would this be? Because they can't run on their record.
Consider Bush's thrilling assertion, immediately after 9/11, that Osama bin Laden had nowhere to hide, that "we're going to get him" ("dead or alive," remember?); followed, six months later, by an admission that "I don't know where [bin Laden] is... I truly am not that concerned about him."
Consider the vaunted economic "recovery." Yes, we added "37,000 new jobs" last month. Unfortunately, we must add 140,000 new jobs every month just to keep pace with all the new people -- high school and college graduates, legal immigrants, and of course those laid off from their previous jobs -- entering the job market.
Consider the federal budget. It's like a wood-burning stove: When the temperature drops, you add a log. But under Bush administration policies, you must also toss in all your furniture, the clothes in the dressers and closets, the food in the pantry and fridge. (Don't forget to burn your cash and checkbook.) Whoops, wait -- save your best stuff (like your walls and roof). You need to truck it across town and dump it (meekly, so as not to disturb their sleep) into the woodpiles of the ten wealthiest people and five biggest companies in town.
Consider education. If I hear the president tout the "No Child Left Behind" initiative just one more time, I fear I will waken the neighborhood with screams. "His" initiative, sure. But when it came time to pay for it? Whoops, no money! (That's what"unfunded mandate" means. Promise us the moon; pay for nothing. Then repeat to us, daily if possible, the word "moon" -- we apparently need to remember that part.)
Consider the environment. Polls consistently show that Americans worry about the quality of our air, water, forests. The administration's solution? Give high-sounding names like "Clear Skies" and"Healthy Forests Initiative" to policies which actually relax the regulation of polluters and despoilers.
Before you dismiss all this as "Bush-hating": no, I don't hate the guy. I don't wish him injury. But you don't have to hate a president to recognize he has done nothing measurable for you and your neighbors -- especially when he continuously trumpets the latest slogan like it heralds a victory of some sort. (On the other hand, you haven't heard "Mission Accomplished" from his camp for quite a few months, have you?)
We've all known people like this -- a dreadful boss, say: the guy who says one thing but does another; the guy who bobs and weaves when put on the spot, except that he doesn't allow himself, ever, to be put on the spot in the first place (well, unless he's well-rehearsed and/or has a knowledgeable aide within prompting distance); the guy who blunders into the most desperate situations, dragging everyone else with him, and will not apologize, reconsider, even think because, y'know, he just flat-out knows what's right. (As this one reassured us in a press conference a few months ago, he cannot recall a single mistake he's made since January 20, 2001.)
Nobody admires such a boss, even if he's allegedly "a nice guy." No one with any sense of integrity and self-respect says, with a straight face, Him! Let me report to him!
So why are so many people willing to follow this failure off a cliff -- indeed, arguing strenuously for the privilege?
Honest, I'm not going to argue with you if you want to vote for Mr. Bush. I really hope you don't, but what happens when you go into the voting booth is for you and your conscience (and maybe, this year, the Diebold folks) to work out.
But I beseech you: Do some homework first on the guy you're voting for. Watch something other than Fox News for your information. Better yet, read something. Visit Web sites like misleader.org and mediamatters.org, and ask yourself why such abundantly documented charges aren't being refuted by those charged. (Maybe they're irrefutable?)
If you help grant this incumbent another term, just don't look in the mirror four years down the road and kid yourselves, Mr. and Mrs. Cleaver, that you didn't know any better: "Gee, but he said all the right things, didn't he?"
Why I bring this up again was a post I found yesterday on some blog, somewhere. It was written by an active serviceman as an open letter to (if I recall) lefties, liberals, and Democrats, and it was posted sometime within the last few days. [If anyone out there happens to know where it appeared, let me know and I'll include the link here. I haven't found it via Technorati or Google.] The thrust of its anguish was: "Don't you realize you are hurting us, your troops? Don't you realize you're helping to motivate a dangerous enemy? How can you do this to us?!?"
Listen: There are undoubtedly loopy individuals on the left who, having thought about it, have decided that yes, nothing would give them greater pleasure (regrettable pleasure, to be sure) than lots of US casualties in Iraq, Afghanistan, wherever. These individuals possibly hold the seriously deranged opinion that nothing short of lots of casualties can trigger The Revolution (whatever they mean by that) and bring down The Man (whomever they mean by that -- an individual or an institution).
But speaking as I am from inside the perceived liberal monolith, I assure you that we are on your side.
The point is:
- what is hurting the troops;
- what is providing motivation to a dangerous enemy;
- what is threatening the fabric of American society, from the grains of sand on Florida beaches to melting snowflakes in Alaska, from pre-school through old age, from unemployed through unskilled laborers through blue-collar workers on up to upper (but not senior) management;
- what is weakening the dollar;
- what is screwing American stature and respect in a complex world where our stature and respect are our greatest capital...
In short, the question about the various messes which Americans find themselves in is not "How in the world can liberals do this to us?" The question is -- as it has been for over four years -- "How in the world can you, O bemoaner of liberals, let all this real shit be done to you?"
Jeezus. Even the Beav, young and innocent and goofy though he was, recognized an Eddie Haskell when he saw one. What the hell is wrong with your eyesight? Who told you to check your self-respect at the door?
