"How They Hated Bush" & other things

Someone sent this video to me with the comment, “illustrates how the press despised Bush. How they hated him!”

Well, duh. Of course they did. They spent 7 years doing their very best to make sure that everyone else hated him, too, and yes, they succeeded. Not saying Bush’s own errors didn’t help it along, but the non-stop (sometimes untrue, frequently unfair and almost always unwarranted and disproportionate) pounding given Bush, 24/7 by every media outlet -news, books, sitcoms, films- contributed hugely to the “Bush hate.” Let’s face it, if Dubya and his wife strolled the grounds of the White House while holding hands and it is likely they did, the press did not scream about it like teenage girls at the Jonas Brothers. When Mrs. Beasley came to the White House, there was no scrum of reporters crying out, “he’s got the leash!” of the president.

When Dubya swaggered, it was “arrogance.” When Obama “swaggas” it’s “cool.” Bunch of upper-class white pretenders calling it “swagga;” just makes you want to roll your eyes, doesn’t it? I can’t help but think Obama loathes them, and I wouldn’t blame him if he does. It’s hard to respect people who slobber all over you.

The White House Press Corps has revealed a profound truth about themselves: they’re a bunch of 14 year old girls. If they don’t like you, they will be absolute savages to you. But if they like you, you’re cool and they all want to be, they all want to invite you for a sleepover.

If they love you, they collect your bare-chested pictures they draw hearts around your name and sigh that you are the best, the smartest, the coolest, the funniest, the most elegant, the most brilliant, the handsomest and best-dressed, most charming evah, evah, evah, and have fantasies that you’ll take them on a dream date! They share minutiae about you; what you like and dislike. And when you break promises to them, they either ignore it or they make excuses for it.

So, President Bush supported vouchers for kids living in bad school districts, and got no support for it; if he had shut such programs down, however, we’d have gotten the full “heartless fascist-out-of-touch blueblood” hysteria from the press. Obama shuts down just such a successful program and you don’t hear a thing about it, do you?

For six years, George W. Bush took a daily pounding from the press and the Democrats about Gitmo: “the worst place on earth.” Gitmo was making America “hated” around the world. Gitmo was the equivalent of the Gulag and Auschwitz all rolled into one…but even worse. And evil chimpy Bush was into those military tribunals, and that made him a naaaaazi!

And now that it seems Gitmo will remain open AND President Obama is going to reconsider the wisdom of military tribunals

Do I hear crickets? Why yes, I think I do.

The 14 year old girls in the media actually do owe an apology to those they spited, hated and publicly mocked and tormented in the last administration. But they will not make it because, you know…that might, like, mean they were you know, wrong, or something and, like, that would be so, you know, uncool. And like, whatever…it’s not like anyone even likes those people anyway, or cares about you know…being fair you, like…that stuff. Isn’t he dreamy? Don’t you wish you were them? I want those $540.00 sneakers, too!

Okay, enough, after a while, all of that just turns my stomach, and to be fair to Obama, it’s not his fault that he has 14-year olds covering him. It is not even his fault that someone like Arlen Specter can cravenly politicize the death of a good man. Hell, John Edwards did that in ’04 with his, “vote for us and Christopher Reeve will get out of his wheelchair and walk” routine.

Here, here is something for grown-ups: A debate on the constitution and the role of the Judiciary between Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer.

Chrysler; does the press know what’s going on? I think perhaps they don’t, really. Or, they just don’t care because Obama looks so good on their wall, doesn’t he have a great smile? He’s smiling just for us in the press! Why shouldn’t he run everything when he is everything!

More grown-up stuff: how is that 700 Billion Dollar “stimulus” working out? And when do we get to talk, really talk, about what it means to have a 9 Trillion Dollar Deficit in our future? No? We can’t talk about that? We just mock the people who do and call them names? That’s all the 14 year old girls can manage?

Picking up where we left off on Limbaugh, Jeb Bush and Reagan, a few emailers are accusing me of not knowing who Ronald Reagan is, and not fully appreciating him. I know who Reagan is and was. Still doesn’t change the fact that he is no longer with us, and so the right -if it wants another Reagan- had better get busy forming a couple. A couple, because some will be picked off by the press like low-flying ducks.

One reader wrote:

What other people fail to remember (and what they should have emphasized more with McCain) is that Reagan came into the 1980 campaign a fully formed man. There were no focus groups needed to tell him what he believed in and what he should say. In “Reagan’s War,” Peter Schweizer recounts the campaign assembling their foreign policy team and Reagan was asked about what the official line should be toward the Soviet Union. “How’s this,” said the Governor, “we win. They lose.” Big picture goals, not micromanaging.

Appealing to the right; “un-nuanced” and “stupid, stupid, stupid” to the left and the press. Dubya was just as succinct and he got crucified for it. The thing about the “left” and the “right” is the left are like a virus that knows how to change and re-attack. They’ve learned to adapt to conservative rhetoric and defeat it. The right does not adapt much, because it can’t, not if it wants to hold on to its principles and beliefs.

This campaign-era post from the Western Chauvinist puts it differently.

Here is something odd: British Airways has taken Israel off the map.

A judge in Britain says that Global Warmingism is a Religion. Well, of course it is. Even atheists need their rituals:

One meets postmodern secularists of diverse interests who remain supportive of a basic scheme that is balkanizing our world into environmentalism, anarchism, paganism, pantheism, food-puritanism and other isms, and who have simply embraced a religion outside of monotheism. If you think by abolishing the Abramic Big Three you’re going to abolish religion, well…good luck. Every secular religion I just mentioned comes with its own Liturgies, Rubrics and Rituals, its own Sins, Laws and Saviors.


Bill Whittle taking on
Jon Stewart. I know you’ve probably seen it, but I had to link. History matters. Context matters, too.

Because Context Matters: Let God assess some things

How do you like this headline? Catholics Attack Dan Brown Film Angels & Demons! It seems that if the church defends its reputation against the Rome-hating fictions of Dan Brown, that is “attacking” the film. Conversely, the film is not seen as an “attack” on the church. Funny how the press uses words, isn’t it?

This is very cool: The Catacombs in 3-D! (H/T)

Remembering
the Mighty J. J. O’ Connor.

Michael Yon: Mysterious Places

Defending Mary Ann Glendon, who really needs no defending, but Patrick O’ Hannigan does it so well that you may as well go read it!

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • rcareaga

    the non-stop (sometimes untrue, frequently unfair and almost always unwarranted and disproportionate) pounding given Bush, 24/7 by every media outlet -news, books, sitcoms, films- contributed hugely to the “Bush hate.

    What an odd thing to assert.

    “non-stop,” “every”…simply untrue. Would have to be dialed down an order of magnitude merely to qualify as “gross exaggeration.”

    [Nope. And I am not even going to go there with you Rand. I knew you would try to engage me there, and I'm not going. You can delve into my archives to your hearts content. You know as well as I do the media made that man their whipping boy for 7 years. Admin]

  • Pingback: ‘Okie’ on the Lam » Blog Archive » “White House Press Corp Are A Bunch Of 14 Year Old Girls”

  • YogusBearus

    Four years is an awful long time to wait to get adults back in charge. Will our country be able to survive the accelerating slide into mediocrity in the meantime?

  • http://newine.wordpress.com ultraguy

    Thanks for the link, Anchoress.

    For the record, and not that it makes it any better but… British Midland Airways (BMI) is the one that took Israel off their maps and only on some flights (strangely, the ones to Israel itself if I’m reading correctly). They’re the second largest airline at Heathrow.

    Sorta like saying it was Adolph Hitler and not his lesser-known brother Alan… ;-)

    Not that it will matter much once Rahm Emmanuel et al get up a head of steam on the same basic issue.

  • Pingback: Unfit to print; the charmed presidency of BHO « Lindy’s Blog: Where Mom is Always Right

  • http://deedledee.wordpress.com/ deedledee

    A CBS White House reporter is getting blasted in the comments section of a piece he did to explain that the reason they didn’t rise for Pres. Bush in the briefing room was because it was informal and they also didn’t want to block their colleagues camera shots; he twists himself up to say that some new members of the press are basically green and oh, yeah, the others forgot about their colleagues camera needs when they stood for Obama. It had nothing to do with disrespect for Bush. Yeah, right, sure.

    [Actually, I am sure it had nothing to do with disrespecting Bush and everything to do with their adoration of Obama. admin]

  • Susan K.

    The annual National Day of Prayer is Thursday, May 7, with events planned on Capital Hill and in every state. Prayer is always being offered for our country, but this day is specially set aside. I pray for an awakening, spiritually and culturally and nationally, since the divide is growing ever more clearer daily in our nation’s direction. God, help us!

  • SAM

    I call men and women who’ve never moved passed 6th grade Barbies. You’ve met them at work or in your neighborhood. They’re the shallow, looks-focused types who, rather than working, wander about looking for the latest gossip. And the men who do it are worse than the women because it’s so unnatural.

    The men and women of the press are a Barbie circle. They spend their time fawning over their favorites and can’t get enough of them and savaging those they hate.

    My sister-in-law once remarked that her biggest disappointment upon becoming an adult was learning that most people haven’t grown beyond grade school.

  • Gina

    The only quibble I have is that comparing the press to 14 year-old girls insults (many) 14 year-old girls. Bernard Goldberg’s phrase “a slobbering love affair” looks more and more apt every day.

    As for Jon Stewart, I can’t dislike the guy. He’s also the only comedian who will actually poke fun at Obama, for one. He and Colbert are a rare breed and I hope they continue to do smart, edgy comedy, even if they trip up once in a while. The problem is really with people who take them too seriously.

  • Pingback: Amused Cynic » Blog Archive » “It’s not fascism when WE do it…”

  • Gayle Miller

    Actually, I don’t think the country can tolerate 4 years of Mr. “I Won” and the endlessly loopy Plugs Biden. We are in the hands of a completely unprincipled Chicago politician with no competence, no sense of history, no respect for this country and its citizens and fully engaged in his own self-importance! That thin-skinned attitude toward any, even mild, criticisms is proof that nobody has ever told him “no” in his life! And I’m sure that if someone does, and means it, he will hold his breath, throw himself on the floor and kick his heels in completely frustration and angst! We have an immature infant occupying the Oval Office. If, for some reason, the honeymoon ends and he must endure even 10% of that which George W. Bush endured for 7 years, he will collapse into a tear-stained heap and be unable to function forevermore!

  • Gayle Miller

    If “The Won” had to endure 1/20th of the calumny and attacks sent the way of George W. Bush on a daily basis, he would be curled up on the White House lawn with his thumb in his mouth and a consistent whine emanating from his mouth, “Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, whyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!” I’m so special, they MUST love me!

  • Sally June

    Anchoress:
    You completely nailed it, characterizing the media as 14 year old girls. Why, just the other day I started to watch BBC World News WhateverTheyCallIt. After 5 minutes, I had to turn it off — it was just one “We Love Obama!” story after another.
    I did not think my opinion of journalists could sink any lower.

  • Gayle Miller

    Our current president has a skin as thin as tissue paper and he would be destroyed by the necessity of enduring the barrage of calumny and criticism heaped upon an undeserving George W. Bush for 7 years. The Won would be reduced to a gibbering infant, curled in a fetal position on the White House lawn, clutching his blankie and sucking on his binkie because for the first time in his life he is being excpected to DO something that requires courage, intelligence and commitment!

  • Pingback: The Bully in the Big Chair « Obi’s Sister

  • rcareaga

    Doesn’t matter if you’re going there or not, Anchoress, you have, as Swift’s Houyhnhnms would whinny, “said the thing that was not.” It would be one thing to assert that Bush’s Press coverage was predominantly unfavorable (debatable at best, but still debatable), but you have flatly asserted that “every media outlet” “pound[ed]” Bush “non-stop.” — and that’s just silly. I can provide links, if you want them, to several of your favorite liberal media villains gushing over GWB’s manly heroism from 9/11 through “Mission Accomplished” and beyond, and unless you’re prepared to define “every media outlet” in a way that excludes the Washington Times and Faux News, you really haven’t a leg to stand on here. Sorry, but it’s a stretch even to describe your take on 43′s press treatment as hyperbole. No malice attends this contradiction, which, while it proceeds in a way from an adversarial stance, happens to be factually sound.

    [You know, I wasn't even going to respond to this because I'm finding it tedious, but sorry, Rand, what I wrote was FACTUALLY SOUND. You may not have liked the choice of words I used, but every media outlet, be it television, movies, books, plays, music, news, talk radio, blogs or whatever was used to drum up Bush hate. Please, don't tell me you have forgotten the novels discussing assassinating him? The films? The stupid sitcoms? Having to watch Bush-bashing on Law and Order? I am quite accurate. admin]

  • rcareaga

    I am quite accurate (insert Princess Bride quote here)

    (I realize that it’s unlikely that people will be revisiting this thread, now that it has been submerged beneath a screenful of more current entries, but since you have asked the question — and you said “please” — a response seems indicated):

    Please, don’t tell me you have forgotten the novels discussing assassinating him? The films? Ah, but one swallow does not a summer make. Far from forgetting these outrages, Anchoress, you have remembered them in multiple. Novels? Films? Surely you must remember them vividly. Can you remember them vividly enough to summon up their titles? Let me start you off:

    Novel: Checkpoint, by Nicholson Baker (2005)
    Film: The Death of a President directed by Gabriel Range (2006)

    Your turn. What are some of the other books and films on this boffo topic?

    [the distant stridulations of randy crickets are faintly heard]

    You have not not provided me with additional titles because they do not exist. Baker is a well-regarded, if not well-known, novelist and essayist, and is published by Random House/Knopf. Range is an obscure writer/director of TV movies. Now, had you been able to provide me with even two or three other novels by established writers — Thomas Pynchon’s The Dying of Blot 43, for example, or Joseph Heller’s Bush .22, or remind me of some of the Bush assassination-themed summer blockbusters like When Harry Met Sally to Plot Bush’s Death or Sniper in Seattle or Four Weddings and a State Funeral — why, then, I might be obliged to acknowledge these as at least constituting a class, however tiny, in their respective art forms. Alas for the purpose of your argument, Anchoress, the two cited works are effectively sui generis, and I, if not the bulk of your other commentators, may feel entitled to suggest that if you inflate one novel and one film to constitute cultural trends in support of your assertion of anti-Bush bias, then at the very least an imputation of imprecision may be laid at your feet.

    Regarding the “stupid sitcoms” and “Having to watch Bush-bashing on Law and Order“, I must recuse myself. I’ve never felt comfortable with the snobs who sneer “I never watch TV,” but the fact is that TV was never a big part of my formative years, and that I probably spent more time in front of the tube prior to leaving home in 1970 than I have since. I am accordingly unable to forget the stupid sitcoms I never saw, and the Liberal Fascists somehow neglected to compel me to watch Bush-bashing, or for that matter anything else, on Law and Order. Just lucky, I guess.

    You could have advanced the point that a preponderance of the media take on Bush was hostile. I am disposed to disagree, but I admit that since my own take largely excludes sitcoms, police procedurals, television news and all cable programming, the breadth of my sample might reasonably be impeached. Within my admittedly less-than lowercase-c catholic scope I saw plenty of Bush adulation. This, you aver, cannot be. No, it was “24/7″ and “every media outlet.” A novel becomes many novels, and a film becomes miles of acetate, or whatever they make them out of these days. It’s not enough that there was a generalized media bias: it must be universal and complete. You say “every media outlet, be it television, movies, books, plays, music, news, talk radio, blogs or whatever was used to drum up Bush hate.” Sure, and “every media outlet” has also been used in the service of, for example, the Christian Identity movement. This proves exactly nothing about television, movies, books, plays, music, news, talk radio or blogs, least of all that they are controlled by a globe-girdling white supremacist conspiracy.

    In an early sidebar I proposed to you that the perception of “media bias” seemed to be assumed with equal ease by Right and Left, and that the subtext in each case ran something like “I, of course, can see right through this despicable bias, and can see that the political figure I adore/detest is being slandered/propped up by the jackals/lackeys of the press.” One might ask, “what’s the harm, then, since you can see through it, and compensate accordingly?” The objection, of course, is that not everyone enjoys the superhuman insight and perspicacity that our media critic takes for granted, and that it’s a crying shame that weak-minded citizens are being duped by the kind of slanted journalism to which one is personally immune — a shame, at least, that these easily-deceived ninnies are permitted to vote. You brusquely responded that any assertions of a Right media bias were perforce intellectually dishonest, and that it as clear to any thinking person that the bias was entirely Left-directed. You cited the idiocy of a relative (D) as clinching your case.

    If you can come up with some other novel and film titles (vanity press and YouTube do not count, of course, since it’s the so-called MSM at issue here) treating the assassination of Bush 43, I will certainly acknowledge my error in this very forum. If you cannot, will you…? Aw, heck. Silly of me to ask, isn’t it?

  • Pingback: Amused Cynic » Blog Archive » Jon Meacham, 14-year-old girl…..a page from his diary…uh…I mean, his magazine…


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X