not exactly news

A surprise to absolutely no one, the New York Times officially endorsed Kerry this morning. Starting on a positive note, with a quick restatement of Kerry’s qualifications and desirable attributes, the formal endorsement then quickly gets to the heart of the matter, the fact that George Bush is destroying our great country. Here’s a clip:

There is no denying that this race is mainly about Mr. Bush’s disastrous tenure. Nearly four years ago, after the Supreme Court awarded him the presidency, Mr. Bush came into office amid popular expectation that he would acknowledge his lack of a mandate by sticking close to the center. Instead, he turned the government over to the radical right.

Mr. Bush installed John Ashcroft, a favorite of the far right with a history of insensitivity to civil liberties, as attorney general. He sent the Senate one ideological, activist judicial nominee after another. He moved quickly to implement a far-reaching anti-choice agenda including censorship of government Web sites and a clampdown on embryonic stem cell research. He threw the government’s weight against efforts by the University of Michigan to give minority students an edge in admission, as it did for students from rural areas or the offspring of alumni.

When the nation fell into recession, the president remained fixated not on generating jobs but rather on fighting the right wing’s war against taxing the wealthy. As a result, money that could have been used to strengthen Social Security evaporated, as did the chance to provide adequate funding for programs the president himself had backed. No Child Left Behind, his signature domestic program, imposed higher standards on local school systems without providing enough money to meet them.

If Mr. Bush had wanted to make a mark on an issue on which Republicans and Democrats have long made common cause, he could have picked the environment. Christie Whitman, the former New Jersey governor chosen to run the Environmental Protection Agency, came from that bipartisan tradition. Yet she left after three years of futile struggle against the ideologues and industry lobbyists Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had installed in every other important environmental post. The result has been a systematic weakening of regulatory safeguards across the entire spectrum of environmental issues, from clean air to wilderness protection….

The president’s refusal to drop his tax-cutting agenda when the nation was gearing up for war is perhaps the most shocking example of his inability to change his priorities in the face of drastically altered circumstances. Mr. Bush did not just starve the government of the money it needed for his own education initiative or the Medicare drug bill. He also made tax cuts a higher priority than doing what was needed for America’s security; 90 percent of the cargo unloaded every day in the nation’s ports still goes uninspected.

I haven’t had a chance to read it yet, but today’s New York Times also has a new piece by Ron Suskind entitled Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush that looks good. Here’s a clip from the first page:

”This is why he dispenses with people who confront him with inconvenient facts,” Bartlett went on to say. ”He truly believes he’s on a mission from God. Absolute faith like that overwhelms a need for analysis. The whole thing about faith is to believe things for which there is no empirical evidence.” Bartlett paused, then said, ”But you can’t run the world on faith.”

I know I’ve heard it said before elsewhere, but one has to wonder what Bush, who feels that God wanted him to be president, will think when God chooses Kerry to take over.

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

4 Comments

  1. Posted October 18, 2004 at 10:19 am | Permalink

    Oops, just sent you a link to the Suskind article before I read this….

  2. Posted October 18, 2004 at 10:19 am | Permalink

    My favorite part of the article is when Dubya insists that Sweden has no army since it’s a neutral country. Dipshit!

  3. Posted October 18, 2004 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

    But if, just for the sake of absurdity, he IS God’s specially chosen tool, then no mater what the people vote he will remain in power. And if he IS ousted by the people, then I’m sure some form of rationalization will kick in. “Perhaps,” they will say, “God is moving in a way most mysterious. Indeedilydoodily.”

  4. mark
    Posted October 18, 2004 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

    I want to make a shirt in advance, just for the occasion of his losing… It can say, “I guess God didn’t think you were doing such a good job.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Connect

BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative VG 3D