Democratic Underground

Could Even a Strong Democratic Leader Get Us Out of This?
March 17, 2001
by Billie H.

A month or so ago, I met a man who was waiting to talk to my boss; I politely engaged him in conversation until she arrived. The man was white, middle-aged, and well-dressed. In the course of conversation, he discovered that I'd lived in Texas three years ago, and he asked me what I thought of our new president. Even though his outward appearance (affluent white male) screamed "Republican," I told him exactly what I thought of Bush and in no uncertain terms.

He was obviously disappointed. "You're wrong," he said. "You'll see. I think you're going to be pleasantly surprised. Give the man a chance." Later, when my boss showed up, he said to her (about me, in my hearing, and I am not making this up), "She's nice. Too bad she's a Democrat."

Well, sir, I am still waiting to be pleasantly surprised. I love my country; no one would have been happier if I had been proved wrong. Instead, I am watching the unfolding of what may turn out to be a national, and possibly international, nightmare.

I've been told countless times that the media is biased toward the left. What bull. The majority of the American people get their news in highly digestible little television bites, not through the more informed and unbiased editorials in papers like the New York Times and the Washington Post. On television, everything looks just fine. Everybody seems to be succumbing to Bush's so-called charm. Polls are skewed; stories are spun. Angry Democrats are currently an unimportant statistic, a minority voice, those silly people who won't let go and move forward and trust in our wonderful new president.

Why isn't the mainstream media attacking Bush like they did Clinton? They certainly have plenty of fuel, and you can't tell me there isn't tons of stuff about Bush just waiting to be dug out and exposed (hey, I used to live in Texas). Think about what has been discussed on the internet about Bush, and how much of it you've seen in the nightly news. They're still spending all their time attacking Clinton! What is happening here?

What's happening is that our country and a large part of our media is being controlled by one faction. The Republican party is currently in control of all three branches of our government, the branches that were designed to function as a balance of power.

Did the Founding Fathers intend for one party, one philosophy, to have absolute control over all three branches of government? I don't think so. In fact, it feels like fascism to me. I don't use the word fascism lightly, by the way. Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary, published by the New Riverside Publishing Company in 1988 (the dictionary I happen to have in my office) defines fascism as:

Fascism. n. 1. A philosophy or governmental system marked by stringent socioeconomic control, a strong central government usually headed by a dictator, and often a belligerently nationalistic policy. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

Does Bush, backed by the Republican party, fit this description? Stringent socioeconomic control? Belligerently nationalistic policy? What do you think?

The Supreme Court, I am ashamed and disappointed to say, will not suffer for Bush vs. Gore and will obviously be controlled by the Republican party for years to come. I don't have high hopes for the House. The truth is, if we don't manage to take back the Senate in two years and the presidency in four, what do we have to look forward to in eight years? A deficit to rival what Reagan and Bush Senior left us? Economic turmoil? A disenfranchised and angry -- no, wait -- angrier, African American community, and possibly riots in the streets? Women living like they did in the fifties with no reproductive rights? An environment sacrificed to the interests of big business?

How about something even worse? How about war? Would Bush get us into a war for business reasons? Why not? His daddy sure did.

We need a strong, mainstream Democratic leader to lead us out of this mess. Actually, what we really need is a dynamic, forceful, and popular leader like JFK. But could even a JFK survive the kind of Kenneth Starr-Pardongate-witch-hunt type persecution the Republican party has been inflicting on Bill Clinton for going on nine years? Can anyone? How can any dynamic, forceful leader reach his or her majority without making a single mistake? And even if that leader's past is fairly mistake-free, how can they survive the bias of the mainstream media?

Now that the Republican party has total control, will they break the spirit of the Constitution to keep it? Are you kidding? Sure, they will. They already have.

I keep threatening to move to Canada. Maybe it's time.

 

View All Articles