Like an ad campaign, the headlines and the lead stories on the morning of Election Day 2002 let the jittery electorate know that the CIA under the Bush administration could shoot straight, from great heights and by remote control. It was reported that a missile had preemptively killed six people presumed to be Al Qaeda members (meaning capture is not necessary) one of whom is believed to have been the mastermind of the USS Cole attack. Vengeance, extermination and high-tech-unmanned sharp shooting all on vivid display to dazzle and assure undecided voters that Republicans are better killers than Democrats. By the end of the day Harvey Pitt resigned. It was a clever and fortunate news cycle for the occupation, which was looking to induce an encouraging and usable signal from the democracy they trashed just two years earlier.

What the Bush infomercial gives the consumer is catchy and irresistible to some. The thrill of being frightened leads to a vote for security over vision. It's a bargain not unlike the born again Christian contracts - here's hell and here's what we'll do to make sure you don't end up there.

During the campaign of 2000 Bush said he liked the idea of the bully pulpit, which is another way of saying he's a happy puppet and contented salesman. He uses his position as star pitchman to keep the enemy fresh and vivid - he keeps black and white as the real national colors and he'll get the contracts that he was sent to Washington to get. He is there to socialize the cost and privatize the profits.

No one for a minute - not even the camp follower Andrew Sullivan - can believe the Republican party presented Bush minor as a candidate for America based on any evidence of qualification. Was it his vision for an energy diverse future - or his keen grasp of geo-political tensions and international cultural forces - or his appreciation of race and poverty - or his desire to relieve the sense of alienation that so many American citizens struggle with daily? Were these the horizons that the Republican Party felt that their candidate could address in a way no other candidate could?

The hip voices that proclaim Bush as a shrewd politician miss the fact that "shrewd" is not what America needs. "Shrewd" is in the market place -we need something else from the hallowed halls of our noble capital. Selling policy and philosophy as if it were product is the cynical and disrespectful chore of the corporate raiders posing as statesmen. They can definitely get buyers and that's what they were after in the midterm elections. Enough consumers bought the product of pre-emption, war and nationalism. Voters were turned into stockholders voting on an acquisition. Iraq was sold as one of those acquisitions and a killer security system was thrown in as a major bonus.

Bush as the spokesperson for these products is the point of his occupancy. That was his job description. He is there to pump up the villains and call in the troops and pay back the backers. James Baker did not go to Florida in November 2000 as a patriot. He went down there to protect his Carlyle Group investors and his investment - the stumbling racehorse who could easily now also be called War Emblem.

The occupation continues to sell their products that they have convinced us we need. Threat levels; chatter and credible warnings - smoking mushroom clouds - these are the fear factors that make the occupation necessary and approved of. The administration is a black hole around which a lot is said and agitated. When looking for a direction or a vision the essence of why Bush was put there is that he must not provide one. And he doesn't. All he has to say is "We're gonna get 'em." (In fact that's all he ever really says) and the contracts and the public funds needed to seemingly do that are merrily funneled to where he was asked to funnel them.

Along with the returns the most terrifying thing on election night TV was "Journeys with George", the documentary that followed the 2000 Bush campaign. It seemed as though he was briefed that he must get the press to fall in love with him. Like Willy Loman, the most important thing for a salesman is to be liked. So instead of this behind-the-scene footage giving us a glimpse into the thinking process of a potential leader this is what we heard. The spunky interviewer asks George, "What about the little guy?" To which the Republican candidate responds, "Hey - I'm a little guy. I'm...5'11"." Offensive charm is abundant in the midst of the charm offensive.

The concept of a "little guy" was too bizarre and alien for him to even have an opinion or plan about. The woman asking the question was someone he could "mess" with. She was just some quirky liberal to be handled - not a "major league asshole" as he referred to a reporter from the New York Times when he thought no one was listening. This "gal" was just a "head cold" with a lens and some questions that he, along with his candidacy, was incapable of taking seriously.

Bush is not a little guy - he's a small mind with a narrow scope and a sales pitch. The fact he was deemed to be the best front man for the forces that put him there speaks volumes about those forces. Bush did not hopscotch around the country to inspire - he took Air Force One hither and yon to scare and herd the voters. It was a weird psychological swagger - the Bushmaster - not quite trigger-happy but trigger ready - cocked and committed to pulverize anything and anyone, except himself that would threaten the peace. It was and continues to be a high gloss, predictable and painful infomercial. The sales are good. Thirty years ago there was another salesman who was even better. He won every state in his re-election - except one. Two years later - he was, as this infomercial host also must be, forced to resign. But in the present circumstances it would be more precise to say that Bush would not be resigning, he would be forced to return stolen goods.

Bill C. Davis is a playwright -- http://www.billcdavis.com

###