That\u2019s a provocative headline<\/strong>, I know, but it is not meant to provoke. It\u2019s a real question, inspired by some of my emails from people taking me to task for insufficient appreciation of our current president, and for unseemly appreciation of our previous president, whom they and the world \u201chate.\u201d<\/p>\n The question is also inspired by something I noticed while I was digging up articles on the good President Bush has done in Africa<\/a> \u2013 that many people who wish to give Bush anything resembling even the faintest praise, are compelled to preface that praise with a condemnation<\/a> of the man, himself:<\/p>\n \u201cI am heartbroken overall by the Bush administration,\u201d Ruxin said in a telephone interview. \u201cBut from my perch here in Rwanda, it is impossible to deny the results and achievements of PEPFAR. Many Rwandans were made Republicans because [President Bush\u2019s] was the first administration that has taken an interest and done something here.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u201cI am heartbroken overall\u2026\u201d<\/strong> You see echos of that or something akin to, \u201che was a horrible, evil person and an incompetent moron, but\u2026\u201d or, \u201cI am second to none in my loathing of Bush, but\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s such a cowardly thing to do, this reflexive serving up of one\u2019s Bush-hate bona fides: \u201cdon\u2019t hate me for saying something good about him, but\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n It takes no courage at all to jump onto a bandwagon, just the fear of being left behind.<\/p>\n So, these people castigate me for not loving Obama enough (I\u2019ve more than once pointed out that I dislike the president\u2019s policies and am rather agnostic on the man, himself, but you know -that\u2019s \u201chate\u201d) while proudly proclaiming their brave hatred of Bush, and I cannot help wondering, \u201cwhy, exactly, do you hate Bush?\u201d<\/p>\n Oh, I know what the answers will be<\/strong> \u2013 we\u2019ve heard them over and over<\/a>. But in the face of this new presidency, let\u2019s change the question a little:<\/p>\n You hate Bush because: \u201cHe stole the 2000 Election!\u201d<\/strong> You hate Bush because \u201che tortured people!\u201d<\/strong> You hate Bush because \u201che created extraordinary renditions and indefinite detentions!\u201d<\/strong> You hate Bush because \u201che wiretapped the American public & shredded the Bill of Rights.\u201d<\/strong> You hate Bush because \u201che spent the Clinton surplus and put us in debt and cut taxes for the rich!\u201d<\/strong> You hate Bush because: \u201csomeone in his White House exposed Valerie Plame!\u201d<\/strong> You hate Bush because: \u201cHe Lied Us Into War with Cherry-Picked Intelligence!\u201d<\/strong> Oh, and you hate Bush because \u201cHe Refused to Sign Kyoto & Probably Killed the Planet\u201d:<\/strong> For that matter, it looks to me like we have a Convenient Boondoggle being exposed, here<\/strong>. Yesterday the BBC asked \u201cwhither global warming\u201d<\/a> and today the media is heralding the virtues and values of shale processing, which, ummm\u2026was not to be seriously discussed while there was an \u201coilman\u201d in the White House, but is now going to save the world!<\/a> Do you climate true-believers who are willing to wreck the economy for a dubious cap-and-trade plan feel \u201cplayed\u201d yet? Bush was never played by these people and because he wasn\u2019t neither were you.<\/p>\n In reviewing all this, it does seem to me that this passionate \u201chate\u201d<\/strong> of George W. Bush is based not on substance but on style. Obama swagger is cool; Bush swagger was arrogant. Obama arrogance is \u201cconfidence.\u201d Bush confidence was \u201cignorance.\u201d Obama\u2019s misspeaks and gaffes are ignored, Bush\u2019s were magnified. Obama looks<\/em> good. Bush looked goofy<\/em>. All that \u201chate\u201d seems to be part of an adolescent values system that is willing to overlook a multitude of sins as long as you get to belong to the jock\/cheerleader clique, and not the Nerd\/AV gang.<\/p>\n Although some seem to be tireless in their efforts to convince me that I should \u201chate\u201d President Bush as much as they think I \u201chate\u201d President Obama, I don\u2019t think we should \u201chate\u201d anyone, and I am not seriously suggesting that you \u201cshould\u201d hate President Obama. I am simply wondering why two men can do very similar (sometimes exactly the same) things, and the first man\u2019s actions can garner your life-long, cockle-warming hate, while the other man\u2019s actions go overlooked and your cockles go agreeably cold.<\/p>\n \u201cObama might be doing all those things, but at least he\u2019s not Bush!\u201d You say. Right. And Bush was bad again, because\u2026why? Oh, yeah, all those things I mentioned plus the bad economy!<\/p>\n Why would I ever expect consistency, that \u201chobgoblin of small minds\u201d when your minds are so wide-open and huge. Stupid of me.<\/p>\n I know I\u2019ve just wasted my time asking this question, that you will continue to simple hate Bush; you\u2019ll do that because it\u2019s the easy, mindless thing to do, because it will keep you aboard the bandwagon with all the cool kids, and never mind where the wagon is going. But please don\u2019t expect me to take your flaming righteousness all that seriously.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" That\u2019s a provocative headline, I know, but it is not meant to provoke. It\u2019s a real question, inspired by some of my emails from people taking me to task for insufficient appreciation of our current president, and for unseemly appreciation of our previous president, whom they and the world \u201chate.\u201d The question is also inspired […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":112,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,5,14,39,57,58,60,72,73,90,91,102,112,119,251],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13339","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-remaking-america","category-910-mindset","category-american-genius","category-bush-good","category-constitutional-stuff","category-crisis-opportunity","category-crooks-and-liars","category-dumb-democrat-moves","category-dumb-gop-moves","category-enhanced-interrogation","category-erosion-of-rights","category-fascism-in-america","category-free-speech","category-health-care","category-the-fourth-estate"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nWell, not really<\/a>, but if that\u2019s the case, why are you not troubled by President Obama\u2019s long and close association with voter-fraud-lovin\u2019 ACORN<\/a>? Why don\u2019t you \u201chate\u201d Obama?<\/p>\n
\nAll indications are that the torture was very limited in scope and that -whether we are comfortable with it or not- information gleaned through waterboarding saved<\/a> lives<\/a>. But the thing is, after making a big noise about \u201cending\u201d torture, Obama has still left the door open<\/a> even if it\u2019s just the tiniest bit, to its use, if needed. Why don\u2019t you \u201chate\u201d Obama?<\/p>\n
\nWell, actually, that was President Clinton\u2019s baby, but yes, Bush continued it. And um\u2026it seems Obama is expanding renditions<\/a>, and continuing the indefinite detentions<\/a>, too. Why don\u2019t you \u201chate\u201d Obama?<\/p>\n
\nWell, that is a highly overdramatic and rather inaccurate charge, but indications are that the terrorists and terrorism supporters who were being studied under the NIE policy have been stopped from blowing people up on American soil, and um\u2026after making a lot of noise about how evil the man and how rights-eroding the policy, Obama has decided to keep it all in place<\/a> and he is becoming seriously worrying<\/a> on free speech, the most fundamental of our rights. Why don\u2019t you \u201chate\u201d Obama?<\/p>\n
\nYou\u2019re kidding right? The \u201csurplus\u201d was a projected<\/em> only, a projection that the GAO eventually admitted was <\/a>optimistic by 30%<\/a> and the mythical surplus<\/a> never factored in an attack on our soil. The big, bad tax cuts (which the Congress voted in a second time, soundly) seem to have propelled<\/a> us to spectacularly low unemployment rates<\/a> (remember, when Clinton was in office we accepted that 5.6% unemployment was \u201cvirtually full\u201d employment). And even, yes, the New York Times admitted that 2006 tax receipts were at record highs and were lowering the deficit<\/a>. President Obama has ushered in a failure of a stimulus plan, he\u2019s going to raise taxes on everyone (those Bush tax cuts end in January, btw) so that will be nice, and if you hated the \u201cBush debt\u201d then you should be vociferously objecting to the nation-killing \u201cObama-debt.\u201d<\/a> And yet, you seem rather unconcerned by it. Why don\u2019t you \u201chate\u201d Obama?<\/p>\n
\nNo, someone in both Clinton\u2019s and Obama\u2019s White House, Richard Armitage, exposed Valerie Plame<\/a>. But if that story bothered you, then you should have been livid at the Obama administrations potential exposure<\/a> of our undercover people, and their apparent leaks of same<\/a> to the press. Why don\u2019t you \u201chate\u201d Obama?<\/p>\n
\nWell, whether President Clinton and other Democrats will agree with that<\/a> is an interesting question, but if believing bad intelligence is \u201clying\u201d and cherry-picking is deceitful, then what do you think about President Obama\u2019s insistence that he must destroy our economy<\/a> in order to save the environment<\/a>, all based on \u201ccherry picked\u201d<\/a> climate bombast which every day looks more and more<\/a> like snakeoil salesmanship<\/a> that is unworthy of belief?<\/a> You hate Bush for believing bad intelligence and moving forward with a plan based on those flaws, so, why don\u2019t you \u201chate\u201d Obama?<\/p>\n
\nThe Kyoto Treaty that our Congress rejected unanimously and Clinton subsequently shelved.<\/a> President Bush decided to work out an alternative to the Kyoto treaty<\/a>; it addressed environmental concerns without wrecking economies. Since Obama is pledging to design alternatives to a congressionally unpopular plan<\/a>, why don\u2019t you \u201chate\u201d Obama?<\/p>\n