Unmaking of the President

Unmaking of the President

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

The ineffable good luck of George W. Bush seems to be faltering at last. The man became President by an electoral accident that resembled theft. His stock was sinking, his agenda stalled, when the tragedy of September 11 suddenly gave higher purpose to his Administration. Bush declared an open-ended war against terrorism with virtually the entire world a potential battlefront. His lieutenants swiftly converted the threat to national security into an all-purpose justification for oil drilling in protected Arctic wilderness, suspending selected constitutional guarantees and piling another $100 billion on America’s already bloated military establishment. His political turn, frightening in its ambitions and occasionally ludicrous in the details, created in the minds of many Americans the illusion of a strong, resolute leader.

Recent events, especially the terrible bloodshed in the Middle East, have uncovered the original truth widely understood about Bush’s stature. Underneath the cowboy lingo, the man is light in substance, weak on strategy and quite willing to cut and run from principled position if he feels a chill wind from politics. There’s no comfort in that bleak observation because the Israeli-Palestinian situation is so desperately in need of wise US intervention. Bush made a reluctant foray, then meekly retreated before Sharon’s belligerence, hailing him as “a man of peace” while the UN envoy described Sharon’s accomplishments in the West Bank as “horrific and shocking beyond belief.” A few days later in Venezuela, Bush’s familiar preachments on spreading democracy to the world were likewise rendered moot. When oil business and military collaborators attempted a “regime change” smelling of US complicity, the White House responded ahead of the facts by blaming the ousted president, Hugo Chávez, for the coup, then had to swallow its words a day later, when the coup failed.

Domestically, as his inflated poll ratings shrink like an over-valued tech stock, Bush’s presidency is naturally altered. Having provoked a polarizing fight over Alaskan oil, he scurried away from the battle, but Washington politicians did not fail to note that he lost–big. Al Gore returned onstage with a well-turned critique of Bush’s environmental and energy policies, throwing stronger punches than he had as a presidential candidate. Democratic leaders are (too late) finding a critical voice, while GOP right-wingers freely tee off on the head of their party. Before long, we expect the media will again be highlighting the President’s frequent malapropisms and writing more telling analysis of his leadership.

A cheerful way to describe this shift in the political zeitgeist is to suggest that Americans are finally getting over the intimidating aftermath of September 11–recognizing that this country doesn’t work very well when people expressing diverse views are browbeaten into silence by “patriots.” What does it mean that Michael Moore’s astute and hilariously subversive riff on politics, Stupid White Men, went straight to the top of the New York Times bestseller list? “I think people are tired of being told they can’t be Americans,” Moore told the Los Angeles Times. “Many have found that by remaining silent, the guy in the Oval Office has been given carte blanche to get away with whatever (tax cuts for the rich, ducking Enron) he wants.”

If Michael Moore is right, that would be truly good news for the Republic.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x