Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
In The Shadow of Nixon
In May 1994, Hunter S Thompson wrote in a poison-pen eulogy for the recently deceased President Richard Nixon that he represented "that dark, venal and incurably violent side of the American character that almost every country in the world has learned to fear and despise." Amidst a time when most of the mainstream press was playing up the rehabilitated post-Watergate Nixon, Thompson pointed out - with his usual wit and insight - that this man had undermined the constitution and led to one of the most sordid chapters in American politics.
I could not help but think of these words when I watched George Bush's last press conference as president. It was a classic Bush performance: defiant, incurious, secretly annoyed, superficially jocular but full of reproach for those who questioned him. He spoke of a few obvious regrets, like the "Mission Accomplished" banner, but otherwise admitted no serious mistakes. In contrast to the nearly 75% of Americans who are glad to see the back of him, President Bush seemed almost nostalgic and concluded by saying that he had treated the press corps "with respect" and that he was "disappointed" by the tone of partisan bickering that marked his time in office.
Forgive me for taking issue with the man as he heads out the door, but I cannot let him get away with these parting words. Historically, Bush and Nixon are in a tight race for being the president who treated those who criticised them with the most disrespect. Throughout his presidency, Bush belittled the press, often with cruel fraternity-boy nicknames, to remind them of precisely who was in charge. To his dissenters in the press and elsewhere, he was intolerant and rarely resisted an opportunity to paint his political enemies as the enemies of freedom. Though he professed to respect those who expressed differing opinions, his actual style of governing was to embrace take-no-prisoners partisanship and to heap scorn on whoever did not see things his way. His presidency was the very antithesis of the concept of "respectful dissent."
He was up to his old tricks at this last press conference. One of Bush's favourite tactics is to accuse anyone who criticised him of either bad faith or of ungratefulness for the sacrifice of others. One would think he'd have given up this tactic after his ridiculous "you forgot Poland" outburst to John Kerry in the 2004 presidential debates. But to my astonishment, here it was again during his last press conference, in response to a question about his handling of Hurricane Katrina:
Don't tell me the federal response was slow when there was 30,000 people pulled off roofs right after the storm passed. I remember going to see those helicopter drivers, Coast Guard drivers, to thank them for their courageous efforts to rescue people off roofs. Thirty thousand people were pulled off roofs right after the storm moved through. It's a pretty quick response. Could things have been done better? Absolutely. Absolutely. But when I hear people say, the federal response was slow, then what are they going to say to those chopper drivers, or the 30,000 that got pulled off the roofs?
It's a clever rhetorical move, to equate criticism of Bush's response to Hurricane Katrina with criticism of those working the disaster management response. But it is intellectually dishonest to imply that there is no criticism of policy without criticism of the poor souls responsible for implementing it.
Even worse, at his last press conference, Bush could not resist using the events of September 11 to justify himself. Asked how he could defend America's post 9/11 record - one which includes an unnecessary war, torture, and Guantánamo Bay - Bush raised his voice and leaned over the podium to lecture the assembled reporters: "Do you remember what it was like right after September the 11 around here? In press conferences and opinion pieces and in stories - that sometimes were news stories and sometimes opinion pieces - people were saying, 'how come they didn't see it, how come they didn't connect the dots?' Do you remember what the environment was like in Washington? I do."
This willingness to engage in bullying and scare-mongering to enforce silence among his critics is the cornerstone of Bush's unfortunate legacy. Throughout his time in office, Bush reverted to the terrifying prospect of an attack on the US whenever he was in trouble with critics on issues of national security. And in a nutshell, this is why he failed: he never realised that the threat that terrorists posed to the United States was not just about another attack, but about the possibility that the government might engage in the kind of overreaction which disfigured American society. If the US stops attacks on the homeland, but at the cost of torturing people in secret prisons, what kind of victory is it? If the president can only keep America safe by trying to scare domestic critics into acquiescence, what kind of democracy will we have left? Here again, Bush was much like Nixon - so concerned about losing a war over there that he ignored the political and moral costs that his national security policies had at home.
Finally, it is his capacity for self-righteousness and self-delusion which makes President Bush such a fascinating and maddening character to watch. This was also on full display as Bush insisted - contrary to much of the opinion polling done over the last eight years - that much of the world still respected the United States, even if the writers and "opiners" don't like him. This was classic Bush: if the facts do not fit his preferred interpretation of events, he simply denies them, a pattern seen in his response to global warming and the torture scandal. This time I couldn't help but find it sad that Mr Bush has still not realised that it was this yawning gap between fact and his imagined reality that made so many Americans desert his party in the last election.
What we are witnessing is the last desperate attempt of President Bush to cover his mistakes and leave the office on a high note. But the American people should not let him get away before we have tallied up the bill for the vast wreckage of his presidency. Not many presidents have managed to start two wars, to mismanage the response to a national disaster, to tarnish America's image around the world and to wreck the global economy in just eight years. Like Nixon, Bush is guilty of undermining America's proud tradition of dissent and free speech and of using the cover of patriotism to justify the unjustifiable. And no matter how hard he tries to cover over his basic cruelty with graciousness in these last few days, we should not forget that, like Nixon, he brought out the darkest and most venal part of the American character for the world to see.
- Posted in

26 Comments so far
Show AllI think you're too kind to bush. He's far worse than Nixon was. Nixon, in the end at least, did have a sense of regret. bush never will. Nixon didn't turn the world against the usa, bush did. Nixon's legacy does have some good points, he did establish peaceful relations with the PRC. I can't think of any good that has come from the bush reign of error...
I wonder if Nixon had been impeached, would Bush have done so much damage. Thanks for the protection, Mr. Ford.
Nixon was impeached but never faced trial in the senate. He ducked out before enduring such an ignominious fate. But resignation was as good as a conviction. He needed to be tried afterward in criminal court, convicted and sent to prison for there to have been any deterrent effect. And it would have had such an effect. That's why the totally corrupt political system in this country let him go in the form of the Ford pardon. They will never put a president in prison; to do so would be to admit that the system they (Republicans and Democrats) have fostered and run is sheer, rotten horse puckey.
I agree with MS. My hope was the pipe dream slogan "Impeach, Indict, Incarcerate".
"I can't think of any good that has come from the Bush reign of error".There was one good thing that I can think of and that is:BUSH HAS EXPOSED THE NEO CON MEN FOR WHAT THEY ARE: A PACK OF SYBARITE LIARS THAT ARE GUILTY OF TREASON,MURDER,TORTURE AND WAR CRIMES!
I am not sure that that is such a good thing. Only because it's a lesson we should have learned long ago, decades before bush and the neocon's came to power. Anyone who espouses the idea that it's a good thing that brand X nation rule the world is not a person/party/king to be trusted with anything other than cleaning toilets.
After 8 looooonnnngggg years of Bush/Cheney misrule and foreign misadventures, I miss having Nixon to kick around. The Bush administration makes the Nixon administration look like a bunch of alter boys.
Richard Deathouse Nixon killed many more people than George Wanker Bush but Bush is (it still isn't "was" yet) by far a worse president. Nixon's attempt to destroy the constitution was panicked and disorganized. Bush's was premeditated and highly organized and succeeded to a certain degree. The years of the Bush regime exposed the cowardice of the other two supposedly equal branches of the federal government, especially the legislative branch, as well as the even greater cowardice of the MSM. The lesson to be drawn is that when someone puts a gun to the constitution's head, there's no one around to protect it. We're on our own. Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George Herbert Wanker Bush and now George Wanker Bush have never and will never face prison for their crimes. This guarantees that it will happen again in the future . . . and the next attempt may finally succeed.
nice article. I'd like to see Bush pay for his many crimes against humanity . . . the blood of a million innocent Iraquis is on his hands--Milosevic was a choir boy compared to Bush, but I'm afraid we won't see W brought before the Hague very soon, which is really a shame because he deserves it, along with his henchmen, Cheney, Rice, Powell, et al. They should be put in cages and displayed in a zoo . . .
"Society is like a stew. If you don't keep it stirred up, you get a lot
of scum on top." Edward Abbey
I think it's time to bury the concept that Bush "mismanaged a disaster", i.e.Katrina aftermath. I think it's deliberate neglect, to further either the scenario put forward by Naomi Klein or the wish, not mutually exclusive, of "reducing the government to the size of a baby in the bathtub and then...."(I can't even say the rest.) while giving away as much money from the US treasury as they can get can. Looks pretty darn successful when you look at the removal of African-Americans from NOLA=no longer a majority of voters there now, destruction of public housing that never got postKatrina flooding (the flooding itself as a result of levees that were inadequate, which was no secret before the hurricane), so expensive condos could be built on that good land and destruction of the public school system (privatized).....(Bill Quigley, who has an article on CD below, is also a lawyer for the many New Orleans residents in re housing problems with the city's desire to destroy; several interviews with him on DemocracyNow www.democracynow.org transcripts online free.
I completely agree. The non-response to Hurricane Katrina was deliberate and meant to send a message to minorities and the poor to lie down in the gutter and die. Bush/Cheney at the time of Katrina still thought that the Republicans would control politics in this nation into the distant future. They absolutely despise the poor because in their warped, sick, far right wing minds, the poor are pariahs because they are failures and have nothing. Only those who have lots and lots of possessions and toys are favored by God. Let the rest perish!
in sept 2004 - after francis - the 1st major hurricane to hit florida for the 04-05 years - in central east coast florida - dubbah and his brother - JOHN ELLIS - were HANDING OUT BAGS OF ICE - in ft pierce - while most residents and business owners were just trying to find clean water and supplies and clean up the mess -
the bush brothers had the roads blocked for miles for security purposes - you had to make many circuitous routes to get around town just because of the security - further hampered by the damage and all the extra traffic trying to get around...
gee what was so unique about that? could be there was a national election 2 months out...?
then katrina - the next year - that photo of his beatty little eyes out the window of air force one - on his flyover - to a fundraiser - THREE days after katrina hit... and what did they do with that - put it out as a campaign piece...
the whole bush clan is scum - S-C-U-M - the only fitting punishment would have them cleaning public latrines in the most impoverished areas of new delhi 12 hours a day and forced to sleep under rail station buildings with nomadic dogs -
We all stand guilty.
We, as responsible citizens, re-elected the administration.
We, as responsible citizens, did not impeach.
We, as responsible citizens, just changed the face but not the substance of our arrogant attitude toward the world.
We, as responsible citizens, are supporting Israeli state-sponsored terrorism against civilians who had the temerity to elect leaders WE did not approve of.
We, as responsible citizens, are carrying out a WOT against anyone who opposes are demands ("War OF Terror" - NOT War ON Terror"), through the support of our elected and appointed officials, our 'employees' in a democracy.
We, as responsible citizens, ....yadda, yadda, yaddda.....!
But I could be wrong !
Yeah... You are wrong...
We didn't elect him... The supreme court appointed him by one vote...
We didn't re-elect him... They rigged Ohio in 2004 just like Florida in 2000...
We didn't support the war in Iraq... Tens of millions of people took to the streets to protest BEFORE the invasion...
We didn't support the Israeli invasion... There was no public referendum, and the weapons deals were mostly done illegally...
We didn't stop pressuring for impeachment... Pelosi "took it off the table" despite overwhelming public opinion to the contrary...
We didn't torture Iraqis or set up Gitmo and CIA black sites... It was the military contractors and outsourcing to private spooks...
We didn't bail out AIG and Wall Street... It was Obama & Bush pressuring congress against the majority will of the people...
We didn't vote for Patriot Act I &II, FTAA, deregulation of the financial & energy industries,slash social spending, & outsource our jobs...
It was the PNAC Neocons & the nat'l security apparatchiks that have hijacked this country's gov't and economy...
After shredding the constitution and making an example of whistle blowers & liabilities (Plame, Wellstone, McConnell, etc)...
Most of congress and gov't employees went along with their agenda out of fear of losing their jobs or their lives, or were bought off...
our system of representation has been corrupted by the banksters, mobsters, Spooks, military contractors, lobbyists, and Bushcrimefamily...
Anyone is welcome to carry the guilt and shame of the corporatist class war mongers if they want to... But not me...
Anything short of a national Jeneral Stryke or a complete collapse of the global economy is business as usual...
No one "re-elected" these criminals --
And election steals didn't begin in 2000/2004 --
http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm
We've had 40 years of steals going back at least to Nixon/Humphrey.
The lever machines were fixed by shaving the counting wheels causing
them to skip 200-300 votes.
The large counting machines used by media began coming in during the
late 1960's with odd breakdowns/crashes and when count resumed odd
fall backs by popular candidates and large gains by those predicted
to lose.
The electronic voting machines then gave the opportunity to steal even
larger blocks of votes from even greater distances.
After the coup on JFK/"people's government," the right-wing was not going
to take the chance that they've be thrown out by voters. Computers were
the answer to unverifiable steals and staying in power.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
thanks for this info...
I had suspected that there had been righing of elections prior to 2000, but I had assumed it was through the usual voter suppression tactics... Like jerrymandering voting districts, road blocks, jim crow tactics, and back channel deals like the October Surprise...
Those who succumb to fear mongering...
voted for Bush.
Those who fear losing their jobs if they speak out...
voted for Bush.
Those who wouldn't take a bullet for God himself...
voted for Bush.
Those who place no value on Iraqi lives....
voted for Bush.
And those who voted for him in 2004....
have blood on their hands.
NO, we DO NOT all stand guilty!!!!!!!!!
NO, we DO NOT all stand guilty!!!!!!!!!
One question: Bush said that the 'Mission Accomplished' banner was a mistake. Is that the Mission Accomplished banner prepared by Rove's PR staff for Junior's silly flyboy stunt, or the Mission Accomplished banner that the White House dishonestly claimed was painted and displayed by the happy Bush-loving sailors of the carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, without the Little King's knowledge or consent? A shame he didn't apologize for all of the outrageous, and often petty, lies he and his staff have told since being illegally installed in office in 2000.
It's never well-advised to try to infer the values, motivations and intentions of people like Cheney and Bush. The dissonance created by the conflict between their pious (if often simple-minded) statements and their horrific actions creates a kind of thunderous roar, drowning out logic and logical inference.
But I think it's like this: These are hollow men. Shallow, ambitious, dim but frequently crafty, vindictive, and utterly self-absorbed. Full of free-floating rage but with nothing really to be angry about in their spoiled, charmed, overprotected lives.
These men just don't care about the moral conflicts the author rightly raises. They don't because they don't have to and they are arrogant enough to let it show. That's why the Cheney/Bush legacy-polishing effort has been so half-hearted. They really don't give a rat's ass about what anybody thinks or anything but kicking ass on their chosen victims and giving away the shop to the chosen cronies. Everything else is just a formality; Kabuki staged as a horse opera.
If Nixon had faced today's Democrats and Republicans back in his time, he'd have completed his second term just like Dubya. Holding bad presidents accountable has been rendered off limits.
Why no comment re killing Nixon? Reagan was shot. Ford was shot at. Bobby K was killed. Martin LK was killed. JFK was killed. Pattern here? Progressives - live wisely.
"The past is not irrelevant, it is not even past."
Do you remember what it was like right after September the 11 around here? ... people were saying, 'how come they didn't see it, how come they didn't connect the dots?'...
And of course no-one in the invertebrate press corps responded with:
"Have you forgotten, Sir, that you and your Administration did connect the dots, but failed to act to protect our citizens, infrastructure and economy?"
(I reference here the briefing Bush received on Aug 6 2001 of impending hijackings and attacks on buildings by A-Q)
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/11/1081621835654.html
NineOneOne was an inside job...
Every foreign intelligence org gave notice to the Bush admin prior to the event...
The gov't was running simultaneous war games simulating hijacked planes at the same hour...
Even when folks wanted to scramble fightet jets to shoot down the planes, Cheney told the Air Force to stand down...
The Saudi hijackers were patsies, and a cover story... Although they hijacked the planes, they were flown into WTC by remote control...
The buildings didn't come down by jet fuel alone... Thermite was used to cut the steel beams, to drop the towers into their own footprints...
Most of the debris was incinerated by focused energy weaponry from low orbit sattelites...
This took years of planning and coordination from the highest ranks in the bush administration and private military contractors and the CIA...
Another false flag operation to give us our new Pearl Harbor & Reichstag psyops moment...
Another "too crazy to be true" scenario, just like the CIA training and funding Al Queida to do their dirty work...
Without doubt, 9/11 was an inside job. And perhaps sometime soon we will
have a real investigation of the many leads which would produce undeniable
evidence for courts to put the leaders of this administration in jail.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
GoldenMean does the 9/11 Truth issue a disservice by mixing provable facts with wild speculation. It should be pointed out that:
1) Yes, there is solid evidence to prove that foreign countries gave us forewarning, war games were being run involving plane hijack scenarios, Cheney spoke something that looked like a stand-down order in the bunker beneath the White House (as testified to by Norman Mineta, Secretary of Transportation, under oath before the 9/11 Commission--I am not making this up), and incendiaries such as thermite were used to bring down the towers (google "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth"). These are strong claims, but the evidence is there, if one will look honestly.
2) No, there is no solid evidence that the planes that hit the towers were flown by remote control (the technology exists, but may or may not have been used), or that there were directed energy weapons operating from low-orbit satellites or anywhere else (that weapons with these capabilities even exist is speculative, let alone that they were used). Speculation is welcome, but let's acknowledge that's what it is.
The 9/11 Truth Movement has a hard enough time getting the public to pay attention to the evidence proving the points that are provable. As a nation we are understandably reluctant to face these facts because we have a hard time believing our leadership could be this evil. We don't need to have wild speculation mixed in that weakens the truthful claims by association.
If you're new to this issue, check out the writings of David Ray Griffin, whose latest book "New Pearl Harbor Revisited" is a great place to start. 9/11 Truth could be our quickest road to peace, because it takes away the ability of our "leaders" to deceive us into going along with fearful, hateful, and conveniently imperialistic wars.