| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| A new low in Bush-hatred |
| 2006-09-10 |
| SIX YEARS into the Bush administration, are there any new lows to which the Bush-haters can sink? George W. Bush has been smeared by the left with every insult imaginable. He has been called a segregationist who yearns to revive Jim Crow and compared ad nauseam to Adolf Hitler. His detractors have accused him of being financially entwined with Osama bin Laden. Of presiding over an American gulag. Of being a latter-day Mussolini. Howard Dean has proffered the ``interesting theory" that the Saudis tipped off Bush in advance about 9/11. One US senator (Ted Kennedy) has called the war in Iraq a ``fraud" that Bush ``cooked up in Texas" for political gain; another ( Vermont independent James Jeffords) has charged him with planning a war in Iran as a strategy to put his brother in the White House. Cindy Sheehan has called him a ``lying bastard," a ``filth spewer," an ``evil maniac," a ``fuehrer," and a ``terrorist" guilty of ``blatant genocide" -- and been rewarded for her invective with oceans of media attention. What else can they say about Bush? That they want him killed? They already say it. On Air America, talk show host Randi Rhodes recommended doing to Bush what Michael Corleone, in ``The Godfather, Part II," does to his brother. ``Like Fredo," she said, ``somebody ought to take him out fishing and phuw!" -- then imitated the sound of a gunshot. In the Guardian, a leading British daily, columnist Charlie Brooker issued a plea: ``John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. -- where are you now that we need you?" For the more literary Bush-hater, there is ``Checkpoint," a novel by Nicholson Baker in which two characters discuss the wisdom of shooting the president. ``I'm going to kill that bastard," one character fumes. Some Bush-hatred masquerades as art: At Chicago's Columbia College, a curated exhibit included a sheet of mock postage stamps bearing the words ``Patriot Act" and depicting President Bush with a gun to his head. There are even Bush-assassination fashion statements, such as the ``KILL BUSH" T-shirts that were on offer last year at CafePress, an online retailer. Lurid political libels have a long history in American life. The lies told about John Adams in the campaign of 1800 were vile enough, his wife Abigail lamented, ``to ruin and corrupt the minds and morals of the best people in the world." But has there ever been a president so hated by his enemies that they lusted openly for his death? Or tried to gratify that lust with such political pornography? As with other kinds of porn, even the most graphic expressions of Bush-hatred tend to jade those who gorge on it, so that they crave ever more explicit material to achieve the same effect. Which brings us to ``Death of a President," a new movie about the assassination of George W. Bush. Written and directed by British filmmaker Gabriel Range, the movie premieres today at the Toronto Film Festival and will air next month on Britain's Channel 4. Shot in the style of a documentary, the movie opens with what looks like actual footage of Bush being gunned down by a sniper as he leaves a Chicago hotel in October 2007. Through the use of digital special effects, the film superimposes the president's face onto the body of the actor playing him, so that the mortally wounded man collapsing on the screen will seem, all too vividly, to be Bush himself. This is Bush-hatred as a snuff film. The fantasies it feeds are grotesque and obscene; to pander to such fantasies is to rip at boundary-markers that are indispensable to civilized society. That such a movie could not only be made but lionized at an international film festival is a mark not of sophistication, but of a sickness in modern life that should alarm conservatives and liberals alike. Naturally that's not how the film's promoters see it. Noah Cowan, one of the Toronto festival's codirectors, high-mindedly describes ``Death of a President" as ``a classic cautionary tale." Well, yes, Bush's assassination is ``harrowing," he says, but what the film is really about is ``how the Patriot Act, especially, and how Bush's divisive partisanship and race-baiting has forever altered America." I can't help wondering, though, whether some of those who see this film will take away rather a different message. John Hinckley, in his derangement, had the idea that shooting the president was the way to impress a movie star. After seeing ``Death of a President," the next Hinckley may get a more grandiose idea: Shooting the president is the way to become a movie star. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #15 #14 mhw: "they pretend Bush is dangerous so that they can feel themselves as bravely fighting the good fight" That's the problem, mhw - they're only concerned about feelings. But they never stop to think how they'll feel when the jihadis are sawing their (admittedly worthless) heads off. :-( |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-09-10 23:54 |
| #14 what is wrong with the moonbats? I think one reason is that they see that civilization is in danger from Islam but they haven't the guts to criticize Islam so they criticize a fellow who won't hurt them but they pretend Bush is dangerous so that they can feel themselves as bravely fighting the good fight. |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-09-10 21:51 |
| #13 Thank you, #6 B & #11 TR. I'm past fed up with the moonbats. What the hell is wrong with them? |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-09-10 21:44 |
| #12 I think an IED is looking for the director Gabriel Range |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-09-10 19:45 |
| #11 "...all because they wanted to look good too, and be "liked" by, the world." There it is, they want to be liked. 7th and 8th grade mentalities writ large on the international political landscape. Nothing more than a personality contest and a naked desire for power. Great rant Barbara, it goes in my keeper file. |
| Posted by: Texas Redneck 2006-09-10 19:25 |
| #10 This is Bush-hatred as a snuff film. The fantasies it feeds are grotesque and obscene; to pander to such fantasies is to rip at boundary-markers that are indispensable to civilized society. That such a movie could not only be made but lionized at an international film festival is a mark not of sophistication, but of a sickness in modern life that should alarm conservatives and liberals alike. Bottom line. Treason is being made palatable and few have the courage to spit it out for the poison it is. This film is made from pure polymerized Kool-Aid. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-09-10 18:22 |
| #9 Wait a minute! I thought they all moved to Canada in mid-November 2004! |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-09-10 16:49 |
| #8 The donks think they have the november elections in the bag. I wonder if they really think they can pull a majority out of their asses? What would they do if they actually lost seats? I think at this point that may be a real possibility, are we looking at mass lib suicide? |
| Posted by: Ebboluse Gletle8036 2006-09-10 13:30 |
| #7 What else can they say about Bush? That they want him killed? They already say it. Like a |
| Posted by: Hupereck Ebbish7621 2006-09-10 13:03 |
| #6 Spot on Barb. Excellent comments, quite accurate. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-09-10 12:34 |
| #5 #2 - this crap isn't really about Bush, it's about the survival of America in any form that we know it. Do you really want the nutroots clowns dictating policy to the government? They will if the Dems get back in power, because all the Dems care about is power - theirs. And they'll do anything to get and keep it. (Not to mention that they've noticed the country is becoming more conservative, and if they don't get back in power now and change laws and rules to help them keep that power, they'll never get it again on a national scale.) Do you really want a political party in charge of this country that will threaten to pull a broadcaster's license for merely telling the truth that the Dems don't want you to know, or remember? And that's when they're not in power. I have no doubt they'll follow through if they ever get power again. There are some things I admire about President Bush, and some things I'd like to slap him upside the head with a Cluebat™ for. But this foolish, all-consuming hatred is not really about him per se - it's about whiney-assed LLL's who will help the jihadis destroy this country if it means hurting a President who can't even run for another term (and who doesn't give a rat's ass about his own "legacy"), while trying to push pretty lies about the "legacy" of the previous administration who pretty much fucked up every opportunity presented to them to effectively attack the radical moslems who have publicly stated for years that they intend to destroy this country and its people - all because they wanted to look good to, and be "liked" by, the world. (And guess what? The "world" still didn't like us - except for a few days after 9/11 when they saw us as powerless victims, just like most of them are.) Here's an idea: Take their ranting and name-calling about President Bush out of the equation entirely. Have the Bush-hating lefties got any other message? And is it a message of hope? (As in hope for our country, and for the world - not hope they get back in power so they can cover up their screw-ups with the collusion of the MSM and pretend their bankrupt Don't worry about Bush - he's an adult and can take care of himself. Worry rather about America - and where the raving, insane Left wants to |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-09-10 12:31 |
| #4 I still support the man Frank, and the office. I'm just sick and tired of stupidity, like this reported military mission and $ 30m to Lebanon. WTFO ? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-09-10 12:14 |
| #3 Meh. Confirms what I thought about you Besoeker |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-09-10 11:45 |
| #2 I'm sorry Barb, he continues to ride his bicycle backwards! I scorn the haters, but I'm out of sympathy for him, fresh out. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-09-10 11:40 |
| #1 "SIX YEARS into the Bush administration, are there any new lows to which the Bush-haters can sink?" Unfortunately, yes. :-( What are these clowns going to do on January 21, 2009? Oh, yeah - that's right. They'll transfer their BDS to whatever Republican is elected the next President. Assuming some jihadi (whom they love and wax poetic about now) hasn't killed them first. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-09-10 11:35 |