Robert Parry: Historical Mystery of Bush's Presidency

[laststeamtrain]

Historical Mystery of Bush's Presidency

By Robert Parry
January 20, 2009

After little more than two years of the Watergate scandal, Richard Nixon resigned and his successor, Gerald Ford, famously declared, “our long national nightmare is over.” But the painful end game of Nixon’s presidency was nothing compared to the eight excruciating years of George W. Bush.

Even on Inauguration Day 2009, as most Americans rejoice that Bush’s disastrous presidency is finally heading into the history books, there should be reflection on how this catastrophe could have befallen the United States – and on who else was responsible.

Indeed, it may become one of the great historical mysteries, leaving future scholars to scratch their heads over how a leader with as few qualifications as George W. Bush came to lead the world’s most powerful nation at the start of the 21st century.

How could a significant number of American voters have thought that an enterprise as vast and complicated as the U.S. government could be guided by a person who had failed at nearly every job he ever had, whose principal qualification was that his father, George H.W. Bush, was fondly remembered as having greater personal morality than Bill Clinton?

Why did so many Americans think that a little-traveled, incurious and inarticulate man of privilege could lead the United States in a world of daunting challenges, shifting dangers and sharpening competition?

What had transformed American politics so much that, for many Americans, personal trivia, like Al Gore’s earth-tone sweaters, trumped serious policy debates, like global warming, health care for citizens, prudent fiscal policies and a responsible foreign policy? How could George W. Bush, who was born with a shiny silver spoon in his mouth, sell himself as a populist everyman?

<more>

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/011909.html

[Enthusiast]

1. Cheerleader media.

And this media remains. This is the great danger. The huge corporate interests behind the scene remain.

Excellent article.

[Doctor_J]

5. DING DING DING

No one is willing to say out loud how corrupt, toxic, and right-wing Big Media is. They, from Limpballs and Hannity to the local wannabes to Brian Williams and Matt Lauer, campaigned for Smirk in the name of "news". We never got to hear about *'s 5 arrests, ongoing alcoholism and cocaine use, perpetual failures at everything from business to school to parenting. The "masses" are so brainwashed by Big Media that most of them still think Saddam was the 9/11 mastermind.

As long as Big Media is intact democracy will not recover.

[colorado thinker]

2. Because TPTB handed it to him

on a silver platter, knowing full well he would be easily manipulated, allowing them to implement their flawed ideology?

[MaineYooper]

3. Shouldn't that read Historical *Misery* of Bush's Presidency

I'm just sayin'

[Laelth]

4. He didn't win.

Not in 2000 and not in 2004. The American people are not that stupid, and it's no mystery how he got in office.

:dem:

-Laelth

[DemReadingDU]

7. Exactly. Both elections were stolen...

By TPTB who wanted to ensure their pockets for wealth would get bigger and bigger.

By TPTB who wanted to get rid of 'entitlement' programs (social security, pensions, etc.)

By TPTB who said we we weren't patriotic if we disagreed.

[tomp]

6. spineless democrats, one party with two wings, complicit media...

...u.s. imperialism at its worst. no mystery at all, really, and nothing much different from the past. the mystery is why they couldn't have had someone with even a semblance of intelligence do exactly the same thing.

[Enthusiast]

8. Bush was a convenient tool.

He was exactly what the doctor ordered. He had name recognition for one thing. He could put on the faux cowboy thing. And anyone more intelligent might have had some serious questions.

[tomp]

9. interesting hypothesis. nt

[tbyg52]

13. As a person who suffered under him as governor, I think the hypothesis is correct. nt

[BlueMTexpat]

10. After watching and listening to those in the MSM reflect on

how Bush will have a positive legacy if things turn out well in Iraq ... conveniently forgetting his failure to pay attention to warnings about 9-11, his lies that took us to war in Iraq in the first place, the authorization to torture coming from the highest levels, the outright blackmail to force nations to become part of the "borrowed and bought" coalition, the complete and perhaps deliberate failure during Hurricane Katrina, the US attorney scandal, the outright corruption in his government, the no-bid contracts in Iraq, his failure to do anything meaningful about global warning and actually to exacerbate it, his outrageous tax cuts to his rich friends, his failure of oversight over markets ... and so on and so forth ... there is no "mystery" about how such a moron was put into office.

Complicit media, first and foremost ... complicit politicians of both parties (Lieberman et al) ... an citizenry that literally could not believe that our leaders would betray us ... complicit Supreme Court ... electronic voting machines ... outright racist targeting to prevent minorities from voting ... and that list also goes on.

The only real mystery perhaps is why some people still consider it a "mystery" ... !

[enuegii]

11. Because, as hard as it may be to accept, most Americans are dumbasses...

Even if-- and I'm sure it did-- vote theft took place, there's no excuse for either election being close enough to be stolen in the way that it was.
Think about it.
56 million or so people voted for McCain/Palin, a priviledged idiot whose greatest accomplishment was being shot down and captured while bombing civilians, and a babbling religious loon no one had ever heard of, for a ticket that was essentially going to continue Bush's policies even as the economy was crashing down all around them.

[DCKit]

12. It'll only be an "Historical Mystery" if the BFCE's historians are allowed to write it.

Somebody get this man to a computer.