Monday, October 03, 2005

The Katrina Syndrome

Until I read more about Harriet Miers and her background during the next few days, for now what interests me most about her nomination is the reaction among standard-bearing conservatives---actually, to be more accurate, the reaction of those who consider themselves as such; after the crass opportunism and intellectual hypocrisy of the past few years, the rest of us know differently at this point. But the self-flagellation over Miers is both hilarious and pathetic. Even before Katrina, exactly what about this president ever indicated that he favors either excellence or ideological consistency over personal fealty? In what way has George Bush as president ever embraced competence over a Soviet ethos of upwards-failing, medal-receiving mediocrity? I've always rejected the argument that if one votes for a politician who subsequently disappoints, that person has no right to complain. But not in this case. Conservatives who voted for Bush last year forfeited their basher privileges on this one---and those who do engage in public teeth-gnashing and recriminations will only betray their own shiftless hypocrisy. Because after four years we knew what this president was all about. One could either acknowledge it, or willfully remain oblivious to it. Those conservatives who chose the latter course are learning the bitter lesson that mediocrity disappoints both its enablers and its adversaries. That is its nature.

So if Miers is confirmed, we'll have a representative of the Katrina Syndrome sitting on the most important judicial bench in the land perhaps for the next quarter century---valuable, perhaps, as a historical artifact and as vestigial proof of what this administration was all about. And with that, we can look forward to legal opinions that reflect the sort of wisdom and perspective Miers demonstrated in the following statement, as relayed today by David Frum:
In the White House that hero worshipped the president, Miers was distinguished by the intensity of her zeal: She once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met.
Now read this recent dispatch from another part of the amen corner. They seem quite nicely in synch. Can we get her a gig over at Powerline instead?

32 Comments:

Blogger Mike V. said...

excellent blog.
just ran across it today and have read back a week or so.
keep up the good work.

10/03/2005 6:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think Miers will do a heckuva job.

10/03/2005 7:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

IMHO, the 52% of the people who "supposedly" voted for Bush in 2004 have sold our country to the devil/Chinese/down the toilet. Take your pick.

10/03/2005 9:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Conservative Bush ain't :-(

But is Tom Delay, Bill Frist, Dennis Hastert... The leadership in the RNC stinks to the core! When did conservative values translate into corruption, cronyism, lies, fundamentalism, pay-to-play, huge deficits, and larger government and deficits.

Bill Kristol said it all: disappointed, depressed, and demoralized.

10/04/2005 12:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i'm amazed that i can still be surprised at the intellectual laziness of the admin and its ability to fuck the world and smile while it is doing so.

those who supposedly voted for this admin are doin a "heck of a job" at making that happen.

it didn't take long to destroy this nation, did it? now onto the world...


feral

10/04/2005 2:16 PM  
Blogger Luneau Atheist said...

Where the heck did you find Powerline? What a hoot! If GW was caught having sex with a chimp, they'd say that it proves that he cares about animals. These guys are definitely bucking for the "Wingnuts of the Year" award.

10/04/2005 2:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LFC--
These guys are definitely bucking for the "Wingnuts of the Year" award.

You must not read Time magazine, or you'd know that Powerline was named "Blog of the Year."

Not that it doesn't mean they're also "Wingnuts of the Year." They've already decided apparently to go down with the ship.

TCR--
...valuable, perhaps, as a historical artifact and as vestigial proof of what this administration was all about.

So, I guess SOMETHING good could come out of this.
:-)

10/04/2005 3:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can we expect the same in the choice of the next Fed chairman? Can we expect anything less?

10/04/2005 5:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was thinking the same thing about the Fed. Any unindicted Enron accountants with ties to Bush? That would be my first guess:-(

10/04/2005 5:48 PM  
Blogger Roy said...

What a complete load of crap. Just because I voted for Bush does not mean I cannot complain. I was complaining before the vote but when you are forced to choose between a giant-Douche and a Turd-sandwich it is difficult to make a good choice.

10/04/2005 7:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about Martial Law, Roy. You VOTED FOR that one too.
I'm not "impressed" with your complaints this far along in the fall of America.

10/04/2005 9:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK, Roy, I'll bite: Tell me how Kerry could have been worse.

10/05/2005 9:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are third parties that could use your vote. May I suggest the Libertarians?

10/05/2005 10:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'just because I voted for Bush'

I'll go a step further, if Bush wasn't selected in 2000, 9/11 would not have happened. It is the "culture of corruption" that they live in. We saw Bush's leadership in action with Katrina again. It was like watching him read that book about a pet goat to school children in Florida all over again. The country was in an emergency state, and he was doing a photo-op, oblivious to what real people were going through. With Bush in the WH and Republican majority in Congress with Delay, Frist, Hastert at the lead, it created a perfect storm. I'm not saying they did it, not at all, I'm saying they created an environment to allow it to happen by their authoritarian leadership, unqualified people hired, arrogance, politicizing everything, and the tearing down of critical infrastructure that was paramount to our safety, etc. Bush isn't liberal. Bush isn't conservative. Bush is a spoiled rich kid who has a history of failed experiences and money through family connections, and the neocons and the extremists saw someone they could control to seek their own agenda. We currently have no leader with vision, intelligence, integrity; his thing is propaganda and cronyism, and that's just how it is. Some of us just knew the kind of leader Bush would make a bit earlier.

As conservatives, I keep wondering why the RNC picked Bush over McCain who was/is clearly more qualified.

10/05/2005 11:50 AM  
Blogger Roy said...

The system is designed so that third parties lose. Until the system is reformed I will not vote for third parties.

I VOTED for Martial law?? Please explain.

As for Kerry, the election was morphed into something much bigger than it was. It became a fight amongst the bases. A vote for Kerry was a vote for Michael Moore. Kerry or the Democrats did not give me a different plan than Bush. He was essentially going to do the same thing in Iraq that Bush is doing. I heard no reason to vote for them. Telling me, vote for me because Bush sucks is not convincing enough for me. Much like the 2nd Clinton term, Dole and the Elephants were saying vote for us were not Clinton. Not a good enough reason then, not a good enough reason now and it won't be good enough for me the next time I hear it.

10/05/2005 11:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bush will choose his personal accountant to replace Greenspan.

10/05/2005 1:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

roy, for the record: a vote for kerry wasn't a vote for michael moore.

nor did kerry offer the same policy as bush on anything, in part because bush doesn't offer policies: he offers slogans.

i suspect, in fact, that the reason you "heard" no good reason to vote for kerry is because you don't listen very well, but that's just a guess: you could also be gripped by denial, or not terribly bright, or some other explanation.

regardless, no one made you vote for bush. if you truly thought that there was no difference between bush and kerry, you were entitled to sit it out or vote for a third party candidate.

you - and you alone - in the face of 4 years of evidence, felt that george bush deserved to be president for another term. And so yes, we're not in the slightest interested in any criticism you have of bush today.

The cunning realist is exactly on point with respect to bellyaching from the right: what frickin' world did you inhabit from 2001-2004? certainly not one in which bush merited another term.

10/05/2005 3:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

have been wondering, for roy's benefit, just what mike moore got wrong? his timing on pointing out what a dunce this president is and the how corrupt the "leadership" that took us to war for personal gain?

the last line in farenheit 911 was pretty much a deep truth. maybe roy and some others should actually watch it.

feral

10/05/2005 3:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Howard - thanks for that response to Roy.

I am so sick and damn tired of hearing that "a vote for Kerry is a vote for Moore" claptrap it makes me sick. Using Moore as a boogeyman is just utterly silly.

10/05/2005 4:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A lot of people voted for Bush in 04, not so much to vote FOR anyone, but to express their disdain for the left, and their delight that in Bush they had found sombody who sent us left-wing liberals right up the wall. The sad irony is that these are the same people who are paying the highest price for his greed and corruption.
Harriet Miers isn't enough of a zealot for the far-right but I'm learning that like Roberts, she's privately pro-life, increasing the likelihood of us reliving the good old days when poor girls had babies and rich girls had 'the flu'.
But the pendulum will swing. Impeachment doesn't even begin to address it - Bush, Cheney and their whole filthy crowd belong in a cement hole in Camp Pendleton for life, convicted of commiting crimes against their country. They'll get hosed off every other Saturday.

10/05/2005 6:02 PM  
Blogger Roy said...

Howard,

Let me clarify my statement since obviously I was not clear.
First, I am not using Michael Moore as a boogey man. I watched Farenheit 9-11 (as well as Roger & Me and Bowling for Columbine)It seemed he and many others were screaming hysterically about Bush being the boogey Man, like many here try and do.
Second, I am not a far-right zealot mad at Bush's appointments. I am actually pro-choice and pro-gay marriage. So I would welcome moderates to the court. Bush was the first Republican I ever voted for.
Third, I did listen to the campaigns of both men and Kerry was Bush light period!(You can call me names and question my intelligence, it seems that is a favorite game for extremists.) Unfortunately for you, many democrats agree with my position. I will not vote for someone simply because I do not like someone else. I thought Kerry would make a poor leader, he seemed wishy washy and he did nothing to alieviate my fears. You obviously think that Kerry had a great message only most of us were too stupid to understand it. In my book it is kerry's fault for not being able to communicate with us stupid folk.
Lastly, as long as there are only two viable parties my vote will continue to be cast with reluctance because my views are different of that of Democrats and Republicans. Just because I vote for one of the two main parties does not mean I cannot complain about the party system either.
Thankfully we live in a country that allows me to express my opinion no matter how much you would like to stifle it.

10/05/2005 7:14 PM  
Blogger Roy said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

10/05/2005 7:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh for goodness sake, roy: you quite clearly have no idea what an extremist is if you have me confused with one, and you most assuredly are living in a projective fantasy if you think that i want to "stifle" you.

what i want to do is correct you. You said that a vote for Kerry is a vote for Michael Moore, which is both untrue and meaningless. I called you on it, which is what happens when you make intemperate remarks in the pursuit of cleverness.

you said that you couldn't tell the difference between bush and kerry and i said nonsense, and just to pursue the point: restoration of paygo, federal assumption of catastrophic medical insurance, allowing bush tax cuts to lapse, a renewed committment to environmental protections, and a host of others (including actual command of the issues) all completely differentiated kerry from bush. that you couldn't tell that difference speaks a great deal about you and not much about kerry.

and you avoid the cunning realist's point altogether. You didn't think kerry would be a good president, fine: the notion that therefore you had no choice but to vote for george bush? pathetic - and not at all justified in your thin-skinned rant.

as our host noted: there is no excuse for not knowing what you were getting with bush, yet you voted for him nonetheless. we're really not all that interested in hearing your complaints now, and saying that that meanie john kerry left you no choice is quite inane.

10/05/2005 11:25 PM  
Blogger Roy said...

Howard,
Let me be clear I complain about Bush but by no means do I think the sky is falling, nor do I think he is the worst President ever nor do I think Kerry would be better or much different. If you think the Democrats and republicans are worlds apart and that there is true acrimony in our system, hey that is your view and you are entitled to it. The michael moore comment I made meant this. The 2004 election was made out to be much bigger and much more important than it actually was. This is because Moore and the types like him constantly attempted to make Bush out to be a boogie man. He and others were making wild claims and I felt a vote for Kerry would have validated Moore and his views. I wonder why you have to include a personal attack on me in every line you write? Does it make you feel better about yourself? If so glad I coould help.

10/06/2005 12:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have been following a site now for almost 2 years and I have found it to be both reliable and profitable. They post daily and their stock trades have been beating
the indexes easily.

Take a look at Wallstreetwinnersonline.com

RickJ

1/30/2006 7:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have been following a site now for almost 2 years and I have found it to be both reliable and profitable. They post daily and their stock trades have been beating
the indexes easily.

Take a look at Wallstreetwinnersonline.com

RickJ

1/30/2006 8:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello:)

I shoulld thank U, although most probably this webblog was created for fun not profit
U would make some money out of it:) If U place a donation button I would give some:)
Keep it up!!!!

Regards,
money home work at make

2/25/2006 8:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

An interesting read...

Regards,
day trading video
day trading video

3/29/2006 10:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very interesting blog.

Regards,
Emini Futures Day Trader
stock day trading

4/09/2006 11:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a fan - brill stuff!!
internet web design

4/09/2006 2:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great blog.

Regards,

Forex Daytrader
day trading system
http://www.daytradingcourse.com

4/29/2006 9:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Check this out for FREE...

This opportunity says:

"Your Ad" Will Be Instantly Displayed on Thousands of Websites and Read By Over 10 Million People Per Week For FREE, and It Only Takes 60 Seconds To Get Started!

To find out more visit: pursuit of a great web based income site. It successfully exposes FREE information covering Traffic and pursuit of a great web based income related stuff.

8/23/2006 6:46 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home