|
Edited on Sun Oct-10-04 09:47 PM by George_S
Imagine, if you will, the scene from "The Wizard of Oz" when Toto pulls the curtain away and we see the Wizard working his puppet contraption. The Wizard of Oz yells, "Get away from that curtain!" We learn his power is delusion and illusion.
Before long, the Wizard realizes he is caught and he tries to make amends, and we come to like him as we see he does not suffer from delusions after all. You could even say he is compassionate when he awards the Cowardly Lion his courage, the Scarecrow his brain, and the Tin Man his heart. He is willing to leave his empire for the sake of getting Dorothy home, and he tries his best to do so.
The great Oz plays his role for the sake of the people, the Munchkins, not for purely selfish reasons in a quest for power. Like in a democracy we claim to have, the power he wields is a form of symbiosis shared with the Munchkins, as much for their sake as for any other reason.
Now imagine the curtain pulled away from President Bush. Think of Bush's anger when he threw a temper tantrum Jim Lehrer's way during the debate. How would the Oz scene play out with Bush as the Great Oz when Toto pulls the curtain away?
For a long time many were convinced Bush and his cronies were doing secret and powerful things behind the curtain and for the sake of "national security" we did not need to know and should not know what they up to. All these government workings were too big and too powerful for our feeble minds.
The past debates put a new light on this secrecy, however, and now we know Bush is unable to accept criticism. What we don't know, we cannot criticize. He cannot even accept disagreement within his own staff, General Shinseki, for example. "Get away from that curtain!"
We saw the real Bush during the first debate: petulant, reactive and indecisive. In the second debate, we see him behind the curtain again: the powerful Oz, resolute, unwavering, principled.
Which is the real Bush?
A public self is normal. We often act differently in the privacy of our home compared to how we might act in the board room.
The difference here, if anyone cares to see it, is that Bush's public mask after the weak and failed first debate became something rigid and necessary in the second debate, perhaps required for the sake his own self image. In short, the new cowboy we saw in the second debate is a mask that hides the insecurities we witnessed in the first.
Again, that would be fine; and presenting a more favorable face with the proper composure for the situation is normal. There is no reason to shed tears in one situation just because we have in another.
The difference is that Bush is so dependent on his Behind the Curtain persona that he cannot risk letting it crack, not even for an instant. It is easy to imagine him crumbling into the more vulnerable man we saw in the first debate if he were to let his mask crack at all.
Because of that, he cannot compromise enough to award the Cowardly Lion his courage, the Scarecrow his brain, and the Tin Man his heart. He cannot admit to three mistakes and try to remedy them. He must stand resolute and determined, uncompromising. He would have to take off his mask and that would be a sacrificing a part of himself to vulnerability. Perhaps Bush, the real and honest man who speaks his mind, is an act.
In fact, if Toto pulled the curtain away, it is very easy to imagine Bush kicking the poor dog. Much of the rest of the world might see this character flaw in Bush, and maybe that is why if the election were international, Kerry would win by a landslide.
None of this would matter but for the fact that the President of the United States is the heart, the brain and the courage of a nation.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
