Conservative Paul Weyrich Dead at 66
Posted By: Gimme A Break on 2008-12-18
In Reply to:
Conservative Paul Weyrich, founder and first president of The Heritage Foundation, chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation died today at the age of 66. He also helped create the Moral Majority in the 70s. He also helped create a group called the Patriots to Help Restore Checks and Balances, which condemned the Bush administration's warrantless-surveillance program. He also helped create the Arlington Group. He also publicly speculated that God wanted Ken Blackwell to be the Sec'y of State of Ohio to help Bush win the 2004 election.
Weyrich was responsible for much of the structure and organization of the modern conservative movement and was an unbending believer in conservative principles and never traded his beliefs for access to the neoconservatives in power for the last 8 years. He was a conservative's conservative.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Just an FYI - Ron Paul is a true conservative.sm
We are not like the people on the conservative board.
It's better off dead than dead AND rude and OBNOXIOUS.
Please respect the monitor's rules, even though you think they're stupid.
Conservative vs true conservative
The Conservative:
I'm a conservative. I believe in individual liberty, free markets,
private
property, and limited government, except for:
1. Social Security;
2. Medicare;
3. Medicaid;
4. Welfare;
5. Drug laws;
6. Public schooling;
7. Federal grants;
8. Economic regulations;
9. Minimum-wage laws and price controls;
10. Federal Reserve System;
11. Paper money;
12. Income taxation and the IRS;
13. Trade restrictions;
14. Immigration controls;
15. Foreign aid;
16. Foreign wars of aggression;
17. Foreign occupations;
18. An overseas military empire;
19. A standing army and a military industrial complex;
20. Infringements on civil liberties;
21. Military detentions and denial of due process and jury trials for
citizens
and non-citizens accused of crimes;
22. Torture and sex abuse of prisoners;
23. Secret kidnappings and renditions to brutal foreign regimes for
purposes of torture;
24. Secret torture centers around the world;
25. Secret courts and secret judicial proceedings;
26. Warrantless wiretapping of citizens and non-citizens;
27. Violations of the Constitution and Bill of Rights for purposes of
national security;
28. Out-of-control federal spending to pay for all this.
The Libertarian (true conservative):
I'm a libertarian. I believe in individual liberty, free markets,
private
property, and limited government. Period. No exceptions.
I actually really like Ron Paul...
I plan to vote for Barack Obama (bash him if you want - I cannot be swayed!), but I checked out Ron Paul's website awhile back, and it seems like he has a pretty great record. I wouldn't mind if he got elected. I think both Obama and Paul seem to have one great quality in common - integrity!! People can call me foolish if they want, but I go with my gut feeling a lot through life (serving me well so far), and I have a good feeling about both of these men. They seem like decent, honest men - well, honest for politicians at least. :)
I like Obama because he talks about the things that mean the most to my family, and I really think he has what it takes to bring our divided nation back together somewhat, but if a Republican makes it to office, I hope it's Paul.
Exactly what Ron Paul has said over and
He has repeatedly tried to remind everyone of our constant intrusion into the middle east, invading their soil and they resent us for that. Oil, oil, oil is the reason and I am still amazed at how so many people still believe that is not the reason we're over there. Carter screwed up so bad decades ago and things have just gotten worse since. Obama doesn't know squat about middle eastern affairs and it scares me to death to think he could possibly be running this country one day.
Ron Paul.....
Not nominated because he went against everything the government bureaucracy wanted. He wanted VERY LIMITED government, NO taxes on individual citizens, do away with the IRS, stop taking away civil rights, NO national ID, free markets, and here's the kicker, return to SOUND MONETARY POLICIES. Now, that's why he wasn't nominated but look at the crap hole we're in now.
He never has gone alone with capitol hill's garbage and has stood up against them at every turn.
He has preached the coming of this very thing which we are bailing corporate greed's sorry butts out right now and they just scoff, smirk, and laugh at him.
I sat on this board and read harsh comments about him but yet most of them had to do with nothing more than his age. The very things they are screaming about now are the very things he warned again and again about and begged us to be involved in what is going on with our government and police THEM, not the other way around. But no, we end up with Obama and McCain. What a trade off.
So, do you think Ron Paul is serious
candidate or just a wasted vote? I'm not liking neither Obama nor McCain at this point, and I've been researching Ron Paul a little bit. I don't know that I'm leaning towards him, just curious if he has a viable chance in this election.
It seems worthless to vote for someone you know won't get enough of the votes to actually win the thing. Any thoughts? Does Ron Paul have enough supporters to get voted in?
Ron Paul
Yes, he has never veered one bit from his beliefs. He is not swayed by lobbylists and the good ole boy system... he has continued to try to speak for America but sadly enough to deaf ears. Everybody wants tax relief but when this man said he would do everything he could to get the IRS abolished, were there any takers? Yea, but not by the mainstream media. You rarely got to see him on there. At the very least, he would have given us a flat tax. I don't hear either candidate talking flat tax, which would be a very quick fix with lasting benefits. But, of course, that's too easy....government couldn't afford all the crap they're used to dishing up for us.
Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez5robAWmu4
G20 by Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COtE1J5NMbo
We do have someone, Ron Paul. sm
He is not a perfect public speaker, but he tells it like it is. During an interview with Cavuto, this guy said if he was an American he would vote for Ron Paul.
Actually, was not a Ron Paul fan, but the more I
nm
Any problem with 300,000 dead due to another lie?
Clinton lie: Shameful, tsk tsk.
Bush/Rove lies: Massive death and destruction and maiming, depleted uranium poisoning of an entire nation and generations to come, collapse of the only secular nation in the region which is now heading for a fundamentalist Islamic regime. We could go on for pages.
Now come on, get real. How can you even compare the two? It's just absurd. And none of this ooh you can't PROVE he lied! The proof was provided by the Downing Street memos if you want hard copy, and thousands of other sources if you'd just open your eyes and look at/hear them and use some common sense. Just look at where this war has gone for all the proof you need.
Sheez almighty, after what this administration has done to America and the rest of the world, and there are still people harping about Clinton's dirty little lie that harmed no one and would never have even been a public event if not for the entire frame-up for which the Wrong Right was responsible in the first place. You don't think they have their own dirty little secrets? Please. Their vendetta wasn't righteous, it was the highest form of stinking hypocrisy the American public has ever had forced down their throats.
pssst....two more words....BASE CLOSINGS. Remember when gutting the military was the battle scream of the day? Oooh, you hated him for that! What a scoundrel, presiding over a few base closures during peacetime (on schedule with the plan REAGAN devised, and argued for by Cheney).Now they tell you in the midst of the largest round of base closings ever in the history of America - during wartime!!! - that it's streamlining. It's all good. Just part of the Wrong Right legacy of telling you when to be enraged and when to smile and nod.
wishing you dead? Me?
Sweetie, I dont want anyone dead and I mourn the dead in the gulf due to our governments inactivity..I dont wish you dead, I wish no one dead..I want us all to be happy and one as a nation and world..I want happiness, I want peace, I want contentment..However, if you attack me personally, I most certainly will stand my ground..because I am not a fool.
2000 dead: How many is
2000 Dead: How Many Is Too Many?
By Mike Hoffman
When I left for the Middle East in February 2003 with a Marine artillery unit, I was told Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction, had been assisting Al Qaeda, was partly responsible for 9/11 and was an imminent threat to the United States and Iraq’s neighbors.
We destroyed Iraq’s under-equipped and demoralized military – the imminent threat to our nation -- in a little over a month. Since the invasion, no weapons inspection team has found evidence of any weapons of mass destruction and the claims that Saddam Hussein was working with Al Qaeda have been shown to be nonsense. When I left Iraq for home in May 2003, after President Bush told us “Mission Accomplished,” 139 Americans had died.
After the invasion was over and the occupation began, Iraqis didn’t throw flowers and candy at our feet. Instead roadside bombs and ambushes awaited us down every street. The administration said we were about to turn a corner. We were told that once Saddam and his sons were captured or killed the insurgents would give up, demoralized by the loss of their leader; peace would reign. By the time Saddam was captured in December 2003, 463 Americans had died in Iraq.
The capture of Saddam had no effect, and daily attacks against American forces and Iraqi security forces continued. It was during this time that the bloody Shiite Rebellion occurred. This was some of the fiercest fighting yet in Iraq. Even with this rebellion happening, we were told there was still hope. Sovereignty would soon be handed over to the Iraqis and another corner would be turned. But we needed to stay and provide the Iraqis security until we could “officially” turn the country back over to them. This would empower the Iraqis and end the Insurgency. By then, June 2004, 958 had come home in boxes.
Most Iraqis didn’t seem to care they had sovereignty, since we still occupied their country. They were still without electricity and faced an average unemployment rate of 70%. Every time US soldiers walked outside the wire they were still taking their lives in their hands. Then, we were told, elections would fix this. The Iraqis would have their own government in place and begin drafting a constitution. This would demoralize the terrorists and end the fighting. On the day of the elections, January 30, 2005, the U.S. death toll was 1,537.
What’s wrong with this picture?
The first time we were told the war was over we had lost 139 American; now we have lost 2,000 American lives in Iraq. Time and time again we are told things are getting better, that we have “turned a corner.”
In the Viet Nam War we didn’t “turn corners;” instead policy makers talked about the “light at the end of the tunnel.” We know now that by 1968 President Johnson knew there was no light at the end of the tunnel; he knew his war was lost. The Pentagon Papers showed this; Robert McNamara admits it today. Over 22,000 American troops died in Viet Nam after 1968 in a war our leaders knew was hopeless and just piling up American and Asian bodies.
Again, there is no light at the end of the tunnel, and we’ve turned so many corners we’re going in circles. Our leaders know they can’t win this war, but, like Johnson and McNamara, they refuse to admit it to the American people. Meanwhile, our troops remain a huge provocative force in the region and each individual soldier a prized target. Failure to face this reality is exacerbating the current chaos in Iraq and preventing real regional diplomatic solutions.
So the question falls to ordinary Americans: How many more brave men and women are we willing to sacrifice before we force our leaders to bring the troops home? I pray that it does not take another 56,000 like it did in Viet Nam.
Mike Hoffman was a lance corporal in a Marine artillery unit during the invasion of Iraq. He is a member of Iraq Veterans Against The War.
Neoconservatism, per Ron Paul.
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr0710033.htm
Fox is #1 among the BRAIN DEAD
LOL - studies have proven FOX viewers to be significantly LESS informed about current events than ANY of the other networks (though they are all back)...
FOX tells the brain-dead WHAT THEY WANT to hear -
THEY DISTORT, YOU REPEAT.
Hey, I think I hear Bill O'LIEly calling you!
Vote for Ron Paul
He has my vote, too.
Voting for Ron Paul
Go Ron Paul!
Would love to see a true statesman like Ron Paul be President of our country.
A politician is a man who thinks of the next election; while the statesman
thinks of the next generation. -James Freeman Clarke
(1810-1888)
I am sure that even shocked Ron Paul. sm
I would say he has some fringe support. I do not think he has any control over that, but overall he is uniting people across parties, colors, ages, religions etc. Who else is doing that? Looking for idealistic youth, you will find a lot of them at Ron Paul rallies.
I do not like Tucker either. I have seen posts on other sites that MSNBC is going to or has fired him. Maybe he does not want to be a paid shill anymore. There is even a Save Tucker website.
http://www.savetucker.org/index.html
NOT DEAD, NOT COLD JUST
tired of watching you run around making up jobs for yourself and causes that you can't do anything about in a way that will cause change. Why are you so certain that our soldiers are bad? What makes you so sure those children will be victims of "war crimes?" Think about that for a moment. You must have a really low opinion of most American soldiers.
I have children and let me assure you that even were I dead or my husband dead and they were 12 and tried to kill others I would feel like they would have to be accountable for what they had done. That is because I brought them up to be accountable. They were when they were 12 and they are today.
My words may be unacceptable to you, but are acceptable to many others. I have to tell you that I am related to some of those people by marriage and they have no love for us, no appreciation of who we are, what we want, what we give, or anything about us. They want to control us and take what we have. The males OWN the children and OWN their wives and those children and wives better do what they are told and nothing you can do personally can change their viewpoint in a timely enough manner to make a difference.
Comparing our culture with theirs and what we would do and want is futile. You cannot even imagine the true depths of their hatred of us unless you are close to them, are related to them, or live with them. We have chosen not to associate with or speak with any of them because after 20 years of beating your head on a wall you tend to tire out and move along to something you can do that will work. I personally try to focus on things closer to home that I can and do work on, causes for which I can make a difference and which will not wear me out in the process. Sometimes after you have exhausted yourself, your ideas, and every avenue you can think of to effect change it is best to walk away if you want to have anything left of yourself.
I supported Ron Paul too...but
Ron Paul is not in the race anymore. He was a good candidate and I was behind him 100%. Even he is in agreement with Barack on certain issues (no not all of them but some of them). And yes Hillary does need to step down. She will tear the party apart so much that we will be seeing a win for McBush. She has so much bad baggage attached to her that if she was to win the nomination McBush would win hands down over her. Yes everyone should be allowed to vote but we should also know that there will only be two candidates come election time. If anyone wants to write in someone else and not vote for McCain or Obama then its just a waste. If people think its going to make a difference it won't. Those votes will just go in the trash can.
For those who supported Ron Paul sm
Great article in the Rocky Mountain News.
Ron Paul has performed a great service for the Republican Party
By Jeff Wright
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Largely unappreciated and attacked by his own Party Congressman Ron Paul has, in fact, done a great service to the Republican Party this election season. Paul enlarged the Republican ‘tent’ to again include disaffected core Republicans, Independents and real Conservatives who have been forced outside that ‘tent’ in the last two decades.
Paul uses classic Republican language to defend that point of view which demands small-government, constitutionally-oriented, fiscally-responsible and true free-market adherents actually be recognized and accommodated, rather than just paying lip-service to those positions.
Most importantly, that message has motivated a generation of young people to join the Party who are technically savvy, constitutionally-smart and extremely enthusiastic about spreading the message of freedom, liberty and free markets. They have been inspired by a candidate who really understands and believes in a Republic and, one would think, be embraced by incumbent Republican Party members.
However that, it seems, is not the case. Too many existing Republicans do not understand the language of those positions any more and can’t speak it in public. It also seems the NeoCon members are intent on forcing out of the party the very people that represent its future. I urge my Republican brothers and sisters to reject such collectivist, herd mentality which is indicative of Democrats while being logically and historically repugnant to Republicans.
In the 1960s and 70s that same “insurgent” group within the party was represented by Goldwater/Ronald Reagan conservatives. For those of you who don’t remember, the “Reaganites” were ostracized and isolated throughout that period right up to the 1980 election, when they were fully embraced. That is why in March of 1980, even former President Gerald Ford was still quoted as saying, “.....the Man is unelectable,” seven months before Reagan was elected President. It is worth noting that Congressman Paul was one of only 4 Congressman who endorsed Reagan in 1976.
However, the Goldwater/Reaganites were never treated as badly as the Paulites have been this season. The NeoCon/establishment faction within the Party has diligently worked to eliminate all true vestiges of the real Reagan Revolution from the party, as exampled by their behavior this election season. They have but one thought: Power and control at any cost. Yet, the record shows they keep losing running against historic principles of the Party.
They are attempting to make stillborn the Paul movement. Why? Because we are strong supporters of the original values of the Party? My friends, we are being weakened further by the poor leadership of that NeoCon faction and its adherents. Check the record.
The results since 2004 have been abysmal. In Colorado, while having a 200,000-vote advantage of registered Republicans over Democrats, we have lost the State Senate and the House, the Governor’s mansion, the Treasurer’s seat and two Congressional seats.
Nationally, we already have lost the US House and Senate and it is nearly a foregone conclusion we will lose 25-30 more House seats and 6-9 Senate seats in November.
In early tests, we have already lost seats in Illinois, Louisiana and Mississippi. Seats that Republicans have held for decades. The damage is mounting. We are CONTINUING to lose Governor’s seats left and right. The Democrats are out-raising us in funding $3 and $4 to one (in Congress $6 to $1) as noted recently by Republican Congressional leaders. The leadership should be forced to explain where it is that we have a winning strategy in constantly compromising our historic principles rather than firmly re-establishing them each generation? That is what the Founders taught.
From McKinley to Taft to Goldwater to Reagan, this Party used to promote and celebrate the core Republican message and historical principles of the Party. That seems to be all but banished from the party, except to pay it lip service. The result of that banishment are, and will be, clearly evident in the election results this November and after. If establishment Republicans persist in ostracizing and obstructing every attempt for the classic Republican message to have a voice in the Party, than who are Republicans, really? I did not spend the last 33 years as a conservative to start voting for liberals. Please join me today in supporting and promoting what should be the real message of the Republican Party in 2008 and beyond. Send the message to the Party leadership that we no longer support any further erosion of this party’s principles! Don’t allow them to keep rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Regardless of whether or not you would ultimately have voted for Congressman Paul, every Republican should have respected the message. That was the Republican way for the first 140 years of this party. At this point, even if he wins, John McCain will likely be another Millard Fillmore presiding over the complete demise of the Whig Party from 1850-54.
There are dead beat
dads all over, white, black, hispanic, etc. Honestly, there are a lot of dead beat moms out there too.
One thing I don't get and maybe I don't get cause I'm white.....but Jesse Jackson made a comment about Obama not doing anything about blacks in prison. What the heck is Obama supposed to do? I mean....you do the crime.....you do the time. So what is it that Obama is supopsed to do here.....or anyone for that matter?
Dead-end dialog
The phrase "sending up a prayer" is not your exclusive property and no, that is not the cliche I was speaking of. Just another sign of how shallowing your thinking really is and how next to impossible it seems for you to "catch my drift." I am out of the business of trying to reach insult parity with you so forgive me if I skip over the rest of this garbage. No matter how hard you try, you cannot pass off insult for intelligence, so please don't waste your time or mine.
You are welcome for the infusion of new insults and verbal abuse. Your repertoire really was getting stale. Verbal abuse is not my strong suite, but unfortunately, it seems to be the only thing you are willing to respond to. Cerainly, the issues seem to be a big taboo.
No, I don't need to have the last word. Just trying to have a little fun but I have had enough of the mud bath for the time being. My condescending self is in need of something a little more productive and uplifting.
BTW, would you please try to resist the urge to plagiarize? A little bit of originality in thought and content would be a welcome surprise.
Off now in search of the job...and a little bit of substative conversation. This horse has been thrashed enough.
Later.
Ths is not my choice, but unfortunately,
Dead thread.
nm
Campaign was already dead. That's why
nm
Obama is NOTHING like Ron Paul....
nothing.
How many dead-end bashes are you going
nm
What a talent, she was dead on. nm
.
I thought about Ron Paul but
there were quite a few things I didn't agree with him on plus I didn't think he had a snowball's chance of winning.
It was not a dead end. The information was there...
you just chose to ignore it, because it was not flattering to Obama. Period.
For Ron Paul Fans.
He thinks McCain is the better man. He stated he doesn't even know what the O is all about.
RON PAUL IS SOOO RIGHT!
This is why the powers that be behind the scenes made sure Ron Paul didn't get proper media coverage and couldn't get his message out there........too many agendas in governments around the world. We do need to keep our butts out of this......no matter what happens, the middle east will always and has always been fighting. Surely the U.S. doesn't think WE will be able to suddenly stop all that. All we are doing is making matters worse by taking sides at this point. If Israel feels the need to counter attack or invade the gaza strip, regardless, we need to stay out of it. Let them do what they need to do and we need to stay out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08gTWqWrI4M
Ron Paul is soooo right!!!
Ron Paul has been so right all along. We just keep throwing more and more money, printing more money, just wasted, all of it! Government is not supposed to be in the business of economic planning for this country....that's not a free society! Government has NEVER done ANYTHING worthwhile with our money other than blow it............they have no business in the private sector.
All the CEOs they sit up there and grill....what have they found out? Nothing....and they never will. Government can't get anything right.
I want the platform that Ron Paul ..
originally ran on back in the 1980's - term limits. Let congress do 4, 5, or 6 years and then go home and get a job like the rest of us. The founding fathers never intended pols to remain at the trough on the Potomac for decades, collecting and peddling influence and serving special interests. Besides, with 300+ million of us I'm certain we could find a new crop every few years who are capable and willing to serve their country for a term.
Paul says in Corinthians
that we will all stand before Christ:
2 Corinthians 5:10, "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad."
So Christians will be judged based on the works they do AFTER salvation, and rewarded/chastised according to such. That's part of the motivation of Christians doing good works.
But you are right, as far as getting into heaven, Christians will not face condemnation if they have sincerely confessed Jesus as their Lord and Savior.
For Ron Paul fans. sm
The article is on Huff Post, but is positive. There have been a few good articles there lately on Dr. Paul since his transparency bill (HR 1207) now has more than half the House as cosponsors.
The World's Most Popular Congressman
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/22/ron-paul-the-worlds-most_n_217971.html
I wasn't much of a Ron Paul fan and (sm)
didn't vote for him, but if he had been treated more fairly, my opinions may have changed. As of now, they're beginning to change.
There are a lot of things the federal government have no business sticking their noses into. Last time I heard, Ron Paul had nailed most of them down.
Since I'm beginning to become disillusioned with both the Republican and Democratic parties, I just may vote for Paul (if he's still running) during the next election.
tens of thousands dead
and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi's and 1,744+ brave American soldiers are dead. So..lets see here..Saddam was responsible for killing thousands and Bush is responsible for killing tens of thousands.hmmm..hey, are Bush and Saddam brothers separated at birth..two fools with a thirst for blood? Seems like they are both war criminals. Saddam thumbs his nose at the world community and does what he wants..Bush thumbs his nose at the world community, the International Court of Justice and Geneva Convention and does what he wants..hmmm..they gotta be brothers, well, at least blood brothers.
Yes? Tell that to 40 million dead Jews. NM
and what about the dead in Uganda? The Sudan?
North Korea?
Oh, I forgot. THEY don't have oil.
and your board is dead most of the time anyway
You all can't discuss issues among yourselves, because you have no ideals. All of you are so different in your ideolgies that you don't even discuss amongst yourselves. You all have no glue, nothing to bond you together except...oh let's not forget the one thing is that you all hate Bush and conservatives. Other than that.nothing, zilch, nada. It's really amazing to see that the conservative board talks about human interest issues and other topics, but liberals, those who are supposed to be all about human issues and solving social problems seem to do nothing but bash, bash, bash. There's no problem solving going on in the democratic party nor is there any problem solving going on here. It's obvious to anyone who comes to these boards who are the most active politically and socially and that's the conservatives. We don't always agree about our president and some of us differ in ideals, but we have some set moral values that we go by, unlike you all where it's anything goes...so you all end up going no where.
If we are so dead and have no issues, what brings you here? sm
In the same boat eh?
The CON board is dead. No fighting going on there.
They need to fight like a fish needs water.
I used to be mad at them. Now I pity their poor, sad lives if the only pleasure they get is from trying to cause discomfort to others. Either way, they are unpleasant, tedious and offer nothing substantive, intelligent or worthwhile.
I say we ignore them and not even read their posts any more.
They're toxic.
Things are dead on both these boards
because posters who have any interest in rational debate have either been driven away or have easily found better places to go for discussion. Congratulations.
Paul Krugman article
Questions of Character
By Paul Krugman
The New York Times
Friday 14 October 2005
George W. Bush, I once wrote, values loyalty above expertise and may have a preference for advisers whose personal fortunes are almost entirely bound up with his own. And he likes to surround himself with obsequious courtiers.
Lots of people are saying things like that these days. But those quotes are from a column published on Nov. 19, 2000.
I don't believe that I'm any better than the average person at judging other people's character. I got it right because I said those things in the context of a discussion of Mr. Bush's choice of economic advisers, a subject in which I do have some expertise.
But many people in the news media do claim, at least implicitly, to be experts at discerning character - and their judgments play a large, sometimes decisive role in our political life. The 2000 election would have ended in a chad-proof victory for Al Gore if many reporters hadn't taken a dislike to Mr. Gore, while portraying Mr. Bush as an honest, likable guy. The 2004 election was largely decided by the image of Mr. Bush as a strong, effective leader.
So it's important to ask why those judgments are often so wrong.
Right now, with the Bush administration in meltdown on multiple issues, we're hearing a lot about President Bush's personal failings. But what happened to the commanding figure of yore, the heroic leader in the war on terror? The answer, of course, is that the commanding figure never existed: Mr. Bush is the same man he always was. All the character flaws that are now fodder for late-night humor were fully visible, for those willing to see them, during the 2000 campaign.
And President Bush the great leader is far from the only fictional character, bearing no resemblance to the real man, created by media images.
Read the speeches Howard Dean gave before the Iraq war, and compare them with Colin Powell's pro-war presentation to the U.N. Knowing what we know now, it's clear that one man was judicious and realistic, while the other was spinning crazy conspiracy theories. But somehow their labels got switched in the way they were presented to the public by the news media.
Why does this happen? A large part of the answer is that the news business places great weight on up close and personal interviews with important people, largely because they're hard to get but also because they play well with the public. But such interviews are rarely revealing. The fact is that most people - myself included - are pretty bad at using personal impressions to judge character. Psychologists find, for example, that most people do little better than chance in distinguishing liars from truth-tellers.
More broadly, the big problem with political reporting based on character portraits is that there are no rules, no way for a reporter to be proved wrong. If a reporter tells you about the steely resolve of a politician who turns out to be ineffectual and unwilling to make hard choices, you've been misled, but not in a way that requires a formal correction.
And that makes it all too easy for coverage to be shaped by what reporters feel they can safely say, rather than what they actually think or know. Now that Mr. Bush's approval ratings are in the 30's, we're hearing about his coldness and bad temper, about how aides are afraid to tell him bad news. Does anyone think that journalists have only just discovered these personal characteristics?
Let's be frank: the Bush administration has made brilliant use of journalistic careerism. Those who wrote puff pieces about Mr. Bush and those around him have been rewarded with career-boosting access. Those who raised questions about his character found themselves under personal attack from the administration's proxies. (Yes, I'm speaking in part from experience.) Only now, with Mr. Bush in desperate trouble, has the structure of rewards shifted.
So what's the answer? Journalists who are better at judging character? Unfortunately, that's not a practical plan. After all, who judges their judgment?
What we really need is political journalism based less on perceptions of personalities and more on actual facts. Schadenfreude aside, we should not be happy that stories about Mr. Bush's boldness have given way to stories analyzing his facial tics. Think, instead, about how different the world would be today if, during the 2000 campaign, reporting had focused on the candidates' fiscal policies instead of their wardrobes.
He's beating a dead horse.
Even Bush finally came clean and said there were none. That's when the *reason* for the war changed from WMDs to freeing the Iraqis (while ignoring bin Laden in Afghanistan).
I find it very, VERY interesting that his sudden *find* came less than 24 hours after PBS aired a very revealing show (*The Dark Side*) about the Iraq war, Bush, Tenet, Rumsfeld and Cheney, with the majority of the people interviewed being CIA agents, who generally had more than 20 years of service with the CIA, and they said some pretty shocking (but not too surprising) things about this whole war. (If you'd like to see this show, you can view it in its entirety on line by going to http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/; I'd personally recommend it.)
When it's all said and done, though, regardless of how many facts are presented, Santorum could have declared to the world that there's evidence that Saddam had SLINGSHOTS, and some unfortunate souls on these boards would still say, *See? We told you he had WMDs.* It's really difficult to even be upset, frustrated or angry with them any more. I just mostly feel sorry for them.
Rwanda, 800,000 dead in 100 days. sm
They pleaded for help from the UN and Clinton. No one helped them.
Ron Paul radio interview
For those of you in the listening area, Ron Paul is being interviewed on NPR. I am in New England and it is on now. But if you miss it, you can log onto NPR on the web and play it back at your leisure. :o)
Benizar Butto id dead.
It has been confirmed the Ms. Butto has been killed by a bomb during the rally in Pakistan.
|
