What If You Made A Point, And Nobody Cared?

If the United Nations is often viewed as misguided and irrelevant in world politics, then Liberal-minded bloggers and media members may be their equivalent! Why? Because their stubborn, obsessive pursuit of ghosts and moot arguments when it comes to the Bush Administration has long since registered a collective shrug from the arena of public opinion, and they are too blinded by their hatred of “Dubya” to see it!

From the “Bush lied about Saddam” camp, to the lost souls still barking about how Bush’s presidency is illegitimate, these electronic town criers continue to push “revelations” that carry no more weight with the general public than your local street corner prophet. But what really is the goal of those making these accusations? Is it simply to seek acknowledgement from those of the opposing ideology that there is truth to their arguments, or do they wish to build momentum toward an uneasiness with, and distrust of, Bush by the voting public so that sweeping changes can occur next fall, with the ushering in of a Democratic presidency?

I’ll go out on a short limb here and assume it is the latter choice.

If so, then why don’t those in the Liberal blogosphere focus on matters that actually resonate with those whom they wish to influence? After months of daily hashing and rehashing of statements, quotes, reports, allegations, and investigations from political figures and organizations, what do we really know about how the ramp up to war came to pass? Despite what the most impassioned anti-Bush bloggers want to push as “facts”, the worst that can definitely be pinned on him is that his Administration took a collective assessment of intelligence information that would, at best, indicate a plausible likelihood that Iraq still had some active weapons programs and/or unaccounted-for WMD, and then stated this “likelihood” as a certainty to the rest of the world, to bolster the “WMD broker/user” rationale for quicker action in removing Saddam from power.

The problem is, that regardless of whether some people want to argue that this was an outright lie, an immoral distortion, a calculated assumption based upon inconclusive data, or an overstatement of the facts, this issue isn’t, and hasn’t been, of any real importance with the general US public for some time now! Even I thought that if Bush can’t prove at least a dormant network of weapon development existed, that he would feel the wrath of public anger. But now I know he won’t (at least, for that reason).

Most polls still have shown a fairly consistent majority (around 60%) of the public typically feels that the war itself was justified, if simply to remove Saddam’s regime from power. Where the Bush Administration is actually getting eroding support is on the question of how much continued military and monetary commitment the US should make in Iraq. The more Bush’s opponents chase the “pre-war justification” ghosts endlessly, the more they help Bush deflect attention from the post-war challenges with which he is struggling. And, although it’s a less sexy topic, the current jobless recovery that is happening under Bush’s watch is a key negative influencer on the voting public that the anti-Bush crowd seems uninterested in emphasizing. Nothing gets feet moving into voting booths faster than issues of the wallet. Bush will be at his most vulnerable if the public blames him for the money drain going outside the Country and for the economic lethargy within it.

But the light in the tunnel for Bush and the Republican Party is that public opinion is still not being effectively galvanized to those weaknesses, either by Liberal opinion-makers or by any truly viable, dynamic, consensus-building Democratic candidate. So, go ahead Bush haters. Keep chasing the fruitless “Bush lied” stories. The only thing that will topple him is the political Perfect Storm next summer of a lack of significant progress in Iraq, a stalled economic recovery, and the emergence of a Democratic candidate who isn’t too scary for the moderate swing voters to embrace.

6 Responses to “What If You Made A Point, And Nobody Cared?”

  1. ymatt Says:

    Much as I’m happy with eroding support for Bush, it actually does get to me that it’s because people are unsure of our plan in Iraq and the associated costs. Honestly, suck it up, America — this is what happens when you go to war alone (and 60% still think it was a good idea, right?).

    I continue to think that our shaky reasons for going in there in the first place _are_ the real issue. That’s what got us here: that’s why we’ve lost huge credibility on the world stage and that’s why the costs we’re now confronting are hard to stomach. We’re having trouble seeing what exactly Bush was seeing that was so immediate and scary, yet had to be kept secret.

    It’s not the criticism that’s resonating with the public, but I’ll leave those kinds of arguments to the Democrats whose job is to sway voters. I’d rather make a _good_ argument since I’m certainly in no position to sway significant numbers of people.. possibly just some thoughtful ones.

  2. James Says:

    You make a good point, for those of us who want to make arguments that stick. Time is wasted arguing things like “Bush was selected, not elected.” But I’m not really sure how I can put your point to practical use.

    I think that it’s often the case that liberal bloggers don’t know which dog will hunt and which will not. When the treasongate story was first reported by Corn and I posted it to my blog in July, it seemed important to me, bt no major news outlets seemed to notice. (http://www.drmomentum.com/aces/archives/000684.html)

    I didn’t bother harping on it because, until the investigation, I thought my info was inaccurate, or perhaps people just didn’t care.

    Seeing the buildup to this war I had to admit to myself that I don’t understand how my fellow citizens think. I can’t get in their shoes. All I can do is complain about things that seem to be a problem to me.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    What is it with this “blind Bush hater” thing? Is there an equivalent for “liberal hater”?

    Hmm, I found this article that explains this phenomena:

    Opposing Bush is Not ‘Hatred’

    “Are you suffering from Bush hatred? Apparently it’s going around, like a virus.”

    http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1005-05.htm

  4. mmr Says:

    Is there an equivalent “liberal hater” thing?

    Yes, definately. And Bush Jr. leads the pack. We saw even before Clinton was sworn in and in the latter years of the Clinton Administration it was _obvious_.

    Let’s face it, the Coulter’s, Limbaugh’s, O’Reilley’s and Hannity’s aren’t really into “Fair and Balanced”, they’ve taken “liberal hating” to an art form. And now, Ironically, their boy Bush is getting just what they dish out.

  5. onan Says:

    I think that your impression that such “stubborn, obsessive pursuit[s]” have failed to resonate with “general opinion” may be significantly shaped by your personal experience of who “the public” is.

    The “public” that exists in my life is pretty unanimous in its contempt for Bush, both as a person and as a president. This most certainly extends to refusing to accept the farce which landed him in the oval office. The idea that anyone would just start ignoring major issues like the legitimacy of an election seems baffling, if not laughable.

    I’m not suggesting that the particular set of people with whom I spend time are a representative sample, and can be extrapolated to understand the opinions of the nation as a whole. However, I doubt that the particular set of people with whom you spend time are much more suited to this use.

  6. sid Says:

    I love your domain name :: hehe

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.