Man-On-God
Here's an interesting piece from Bill Keller in the The New York Times today.
I'm always made uncomfortable when someone makes me think past my personal knee-jerk commandments—especially since that is what I am often guilty of insisting that others do. Hence, my core humanity. But, indeed, Keller accomplishes that feat here. And for that, I thank him.
But two of Keller's passages give me pause. The first:
[Bush's] advocacy of faith-based social programs, for example, clearly grows from his conviction, based on personal experience, that religion can bring an extra charisma to problems like drug abuse. If that also happens to win him religious votes and to coincide with the Republican aversion to government social programs, so much the better for Mr. Bush.
Here, I feel Keller misses the point just a tad. Most of Bush's critics might well turn down the heat a few degrees were the president satisfied with simple bully-pulpit advocacy. This is a centuries-old tradition in this country. We want and need the Oval Office to frame discussion on the era's main issues. What we cannot tolerate, however, is that framing veering into a faux debate, while a resolute legislative/executive body apparatus works behind the scenes turning that advocacy into law: an ironclad fait accompli. All done while folks are trying to follow the phoney discussion. This is where the comparisons to 1930s' Germany arise.
The second issue which gives me pause:
On many of the most morally charged issues, Mr. Bush has so far avoided quixotic battles. He endorsed a law against certain late-term abortions, but shows no inclination to go after Roe v. Wade, a move that would be enormously unpopular. He has not declared—because no situation has forced him to—whether he thinks private sexual behavior falls under a constitutional right to privacy.
Perhaps, this is the strategy the Democrats would be wise to follow. Force the issue—on all the issues. This may well be where Bush is most vulnerable. Force him to take all of those loud, messy and clear stands that the administration works 24/7 to avoid. Help the American people to see the man behind the curtain.
Push Bush out of hiding on the messy Santorum sex scandal. Just how would the populace react if the administration was forced to openly back Sen. Man-on-Dog? Or how much damage would occur to Bush's right flank if Rick Santorum were to be Trent Lott-ed?
How would the country react to the president, say, if he were forced to respond to the actual impact of his policies? In human terms, rather than in meaningless sound bites.
How would people respond if Bush had his warm and fuzzy "Education President" image dashed, and was finally forced to deal in facts?
Facts such as:
Administration policies merely passing federal education costs on to destitute state and local governments. This means thousands of already underpaid teachers in your state are then thrown out of work, doubling and tripling the class sizes for the lucky ones remaining. Or what of the administration's quiet fight to abolish Title IX and take away your daughter's sports program? Or setting up an environment where segregation is allowed to return to school functions?
How would you react upon hearing just how badly this Education President has screwed up your child's education?
Currently, there is a massive disconnect between what we perceive to be Bush's charm and his carefully crafted image, and what his administration has actually done to this point. They've blended his "God-fearing" persona into his policies, until that endearing, goofy grin obscures every policy point folks have said they disagree with—in every poll taken over the last three years. Break up the disconnect and attach the policy, and its impact, to the man, and see how we react.
There was the initial thought when the Republicans wrested control of government that it was sufficient and wise to merely give them enough rope, and they would happily lynch themselves. Which they have done. But, the GOP's wisdom in wrapping themselves and their agenda in red, white and blue bunting has screened them from the country's view—on the very blunders and excesses that were expected of them. Unfortunately, it's given them cover, and plenty of time to hang themselves, realize what they've done, pull themselves down, put make-up over the rope burns, deny they were ever dangling, then write a pithy press release saying how wonderful life is, and, gee, let's have more.
On and on this administration goes, into the land of total moral certainty. With no real opposition to contend with, because we are terribly lucky to have a president who thinks God speaks to him.
However, in a country which has increasingly had to face a "my way or the highway" government, it seems critical that Democrats begin to show people just how many of them are already being forced onto "the highway."
Remember! Write your elected officials, today!
posted by Gotham 2:09 PM
