Blumenthal: State of Indifference

[kskiska]

Unlike past presidents dealing with the consequences of war, Bush has walled himself off from the public and the Congress it elected.

By Sidney Blumenthal

Jan. 23, 2007 | When the hopelessly prodigal son mounts the podium to deliver his sixth State of the Union address, seated behind him will be the parents he never had: the good mother, caring yet demanding responsibility, and the bad father, granting license for misadventure. As he evades and rebuffs Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, President Bush clings to Vice President Dick Cheney as his permissive authority figure.

On Monday, the day before his speech, Bush descended to "the weakest point of his presidency, facing deep public dissatisfaction over his Iraq war policies and eroding confidence in his leadership," the Washington Post reported, referring to the ABC News/Washington Post poll that disclosed Bush as the most unpopular president since Richard Nixon on the eve of his resignation.

In the face of such dire political prospects, Bush has decided that public opinion is no longer a factor that concerns him. Every other president coping with the hazards of war, from Lincoln to Nixon, strained to manage public support. At a similar stage in the Nixon presidency, Nixon was drunk, speaking to the portraits on the White House walls, and forcing Henry Kissinger to pray with him on his knees. With the public hardening and broadening its opposition to his policy, Bush has simply cut himself off from its opinion. He has abandoned caring what the country thinks, except in his imagined end of the story, where he is the victor. For now, he will escalate as he pleases, blessed by Cheney.

(snip)

Oblivious to realities in Iraq, Bush is also increasingly oblivious to political realities at home. Herbert Hoover, acclaimed as the most talented and skillful man of his time, was incapable of rising above his narrow perspectives in the face of the Depression, and his stubborn limitations marked his party for two generations. Bush views his State of the Union speech as another occasion for declaring what he will do regardless of what anyone thinks (with Cheney's approval). His intention is not to report on the state of the Union. It is to express his state of indifference to the Union.

more…
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/01/23/state_of_parties/

[Selatius]

1. Blumenthal's description of him is eerily reminiscent of Hitler in his last days

He had grown so detached from reality that he was ordering units into battle that had long ago ceased to exist, destroyed by the war he had created. Reality had grown so upsetting for him that he retreated into his own little world more and more each day. He continued on even though the Red Army had surrounded Berlin and were pounding away with artillery at the Reich Chancellery.

[JohnnyLib2]

2. Blumenthal is probably right on the mark with this chilling analysis.

The short version is "deeper into the quagmire." We'll know for sure tomorrow.

The point made about Hoover offers some hope for the future, ". . .his stubborn limitations marked his party for two generations."

Critical times, these.

[barb162]

3. Normally I like Blumenthal analyses

but I think he's wrong here. Bush is not oblivious any more. He knows damned well what's going on. Still, he keeps on the same course. That's even more destructive, that is, he thinks he's right.