The Architect's Turd

Karl Rove's defense of Bush's Presidential record in today's Wall Street Journal is a prime example of Rove's spinning technique: righteous moral indignation woven together with simple truisms presented as a tapestry of indisputable truth. If the piece wasn't the most read and emailed piece in today's journal, it wouldn't be worth reviewing, but it is, so it's worth tugging at the loose threads of this frayed fabric.
First off, I don't really care that Rove thinks that Bush is a decent man. This is an eminently debatable point that turns on one's subjective moral views as to what makes someone decent. Since 2001 I have thought that Bush was puerile,fatuous, vindictive, and petty, but that is neither here nor there anymore than what Rove considers decent. Let's review some of Rove's more objective claims of Bush presidential success.

1. "Mr. Bush was right about Iraq." Really? He was wrong that Iraq harbored weapons of mass destruction, he was wrong that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11, he was wrong about how much the war would cost in blood and treasure, and he was wrong about how long the war would take. Furthermore he failed to comprehend the geostrategic consequences of bogging us down in a discretionary war that has empowered the Iranians by liberating Iraq's Shia majority, vitiated our troop strength in our necessary war in Afghanistan, and distracted us from the real threat of the weapons of mass destruction developed by North Korea during our bungling in Iraq. If Rove thinks that Bush was right about Iraq because the surge worked then this just begs the question why Bush didn't deploy large numbers of troops in the first place when many, most notably General Shinseki, advised him to do so. It was only after years of bungling that Bush found the right strategy- the one he had ridiculed in the first place.

2. "Mr. Bush was right to establish a doctrine that holds those who harbor, train and support terrorists as responsible as the terrorists themselves." Is that why we supported dictator Musharraf for so long? Is that why we invaded Pakistan? Is that why we invaded Saudi Arabia, ground zero for terrorist financing? Oh wait, we didn't any of those things. N'uff said.

3. "At home, Mr. Bush cut income taxes for every American who pays taxes. He also cut taxes on capital, investment and savings. The result was 52 months of growth and the strongest economy of any developed country." This claim is my jaw dropping favorite. All I can say is, have you checked your 401(k) lately?

Rove is right that Bush deserves some credit for combating AIDS in Africa, let's give some credit where credit is due. The rest of the conservative fluff in the piece isn't really worth addressing, although I still doubt to this day that Bush ever has read the Constitution, so I don't know how you can credit him with picking judges that strictly interpret something he has never read or understood. Furthermore, the phrase "strict construction" is only salient for those with a weak grasp of the Constitution. Please explain to me how you "strictly construct" the 9th Amendment, or the Privileges and Immunities" clauses. Get real. But that's a rant for another day.

A Melancholy Day

September 11th will always be a melancholy day for New Yorkers at least until the last living memory of the day passes.  A  crystalline fall day savaged by history.  Even those in the heartland who condemn New York for its delightful and diverse iniquity were with us on that day.  Now, however, the boys and girls from the heartland have taken the day from us and used it to spin their incessant fear mongering that cloaks  their will to power.

Any chance that someone could convince me that President Bush deserved his title collapsed like the twin towers that day.  His feeble uncomprehending expression in the school classroom when he was told of the attacks is etched into my mind as indelibly as any horror from that day.  When I wanted John Wayne from Stage Coach I got Elmer Fudd from Bugs Bunny instead.  When thousands of innocent people are slaughtered and the heart of American capitalism is attacked, he decides to keep reading a children's book.  Then he got on a plane to run away and hide like a fucking pussy.  Instead of standing up and taking control of the situation he let the situation control him.  

Let his apologists coo and spew what a virile leader he is, and how he has saved the Republic from the ravages of our enemies.  All I know is that seven years later Osama Bin Laden is still being hosted by the Taliban in Pakistan, whose tribal autonomous zone is the first place this New Yorker would have invaded after locking down Afghanistan.  Iraq has been a waste of time and money.  Explain to me the logic of going after religious extremists by attacking a secular state.  A New Yorker wouldn't have wasted time with Iraq and would have pursued the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden into Pakistan as relentlessly as Patton did the Germans.  But, alas, we were fated to have a half witted faux Texan as our leader, and our enemy is still with us.