The Bush Loyal
by Meg Gardner
"Feminism" is dead. The word that is, not the movement.
"Liberal" was killed in the eighties, but may be
staging a comeback. "Christian" suffered a major
loss about the time that "Liberal" was killed. With
Reverend Phelps and Pat Robertson still bleating-on, "Christian"
is not showing any improvement.
Now it appears that "loyalty" is in danger, too.
I know that because the word "loyalty" is making
me cringe now the way 'Christian' does when I hear it spoken
or see it written. "loyalty" used to mean a strong,
personal connection to someone loved and respected. Loyalty
was earned naturally, not forced in any way. Except maybe
the loyalty for the odd relative or two where loyalty came
from a sense-of-duty along with love and respect for family.
But, even then, loyalty is given out of free will.
Its plain to see what's gone wrong: the Bushies are killing
"loyalty". We heard early on in the 2000 presidential
race that George W. Bush prized "loyalty". In fact,
"loyalty" is a Bush family tradition. We learned
how it was young Bush's job to punish those who were not loyal
to Bush the elder. We learned that the Bushies regard campaign
money and commitments made early in a campaign far above money
and commitment made later, when the outcome of the race is
more certain. We learned that the Bushies were taking notes
on those who questioned George W. Bush's campaign when it
faltered. The media actually covered these Bush "loyalty"
facts, so the Bushies must have meant for these nuggets to
get out. Intimidation can work wonders when used appropriately
as a tool of compliance.
I have a theory about the W. approach to "loyalty."
We all know that George W. Bush has a short attention span.
He tells us he is a born-again-Christian. He says he reads
the bible often. Perhaps, this is where he gets his ideas.
This makes sense because the opportunity for a fresh Bush
thought is obviously very limited. The old-testament God used
plagues, floods, and locusts to get human attention. God even
ordered Abraham to kill his son to demonstrate loyalty. One
could make a case that George W. Bush believes such "loyalty"
is his due as the rightful leader of the American ruling class.
He enjoyed revving up the Texas death-machine. He doesn't
seem to mind bringing us to the brink of war with the Russians,
Koreans or Chinese. Kill for him. Die for him. Don't ask any
questions. Perhaps, George W. Bush hasn't made it past the
Old Testament yet.
I have another, complementary theory about Bush "loyalty."
It's called Fascism. Webster's second definition says Fascism
is "a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic
or dictatorial control." George W. Bush did say governing
would be a lot easier if the USA was a dictatorship and he
was the dictator. I believe he meant that with all of his
much referenced "heart." ("Heart" is another
word on life-support.) George W. Bush likes to see operations
run smoothly by merely saying "Make it so" and letting
others do all of the work. Of course, he doesn't have to suffer,
earn anything or prove anything. Why should he? He was born
into the royal family. I like to think of George W. Bush's
administration as George II's water system. Where the top
gets the fresh, filtered water and the rest of us get their
effluent: dirty air, dirty beef, and dirty water. No wonder
the sound of the word "loyalty" is starting to make
me nauseated. As we've already seen, the "loyalty"
only flows one-way. Ask Christine Todd Whitman, Colin Powell,
Paul O'Neill and Ann Veneman's staffie how the Bush "loyalty"
flows. They might be tempted to call it the Bush loyal flush.
I know I do.
© 2001 - 2004 Democratic Underground, LLC
Important Notice: Articles
published on the Democratic Underground website are the opinions of the individuals
who write them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic