G.W.B. - THE MAN

G.W.B. - THE MAN
by Dave Munger

When I first set out to write my little column on George W. Bush, I started with a reminiscence of the Bush years, and how much I have hated George Sr. since high school. I ended the opening paragraph of the first draft talking about how much it burned me to have been compelled to vote for him. I then gave very brief opinions on Compassionate Conservatism (I'm in the "it's not new" camp on that issue, and referred to Readers Digest as an embodiment of CC philosophy), and the cocaine question (where, with bold originality, I expressed admiration for Bush's original "no comment" position, but said that he'd already blown it and would become increasingly Clintonian if he didn't just come clean).

I then struggled to make the point that voting for George Bush junior is not such a bad idea on the grounds that he's only running for President. That paragraph made the tangential case that the Presidency can do very little good from a Conservative standpoint, but that a Democrat in that office can do very great harm, so the most important thing is to keep Democrats away from the Presidency, and elect Conservatives where they might actually make a difference.

There was something in there about the importance of Republicans in Congress being emboldened by a Republican president, and by the support of their traditional constituency. I blamed Congress's recent record of not standing up for the things they were elected for on the voters who threaten to bolt at the drop of a hat, and wrote that voting for third party candidates would make it worse.

Then I went even further off subject with a misanthropic riff on how we expect too much of Presidential candidates because of our unpatriotic laziness. I attributed the strong wish in voters' hearts for a trustworthy and principled President to a desire to have to be concerned with politics only once every four years, a lack of vigilance, and a protectiveness of our images of ourselves as principled. I concluded the first draft with an order for all of my followers to vote for George W. Bush, then ride his butt for the next four years.

Unfortunately, the subject of the article was supposed to be Bush himself, who is technically a person and not a mere focal point for the frustrations and aspirations of the Munger will/ego matrix. My editor asked me to do a rewrite that would concern itself more with the man behind the spin. Before attempting this, I should state that I don't know much about him, don't care to know that much more than I do, and that I believe that it is wrong to concern ourselves overmuch with the personal constitutions of those who would become the instruments of our collective will. I am told that most farmers prefer not to name their pigs. Also, the spin itself eludes me; I'm not even sure what I'm supposed to think of the man, let alone what I do. However, I don't believe this disqualifies me from writing this column; if I am not representative of most peoples' blurry views of George, then I am perhaps more objective than most.

What I know about the person of Bush Jr. follows. His dad is an anus. He used drugs as a young man and has dealt with the matter in a ferrety manner. He has in effect simultaneously confirmed and denied it, and used it as an opportunity to mount a high horse against the politics of personal destruction. He wants to be the President very badly. Ideology is secondary to this end, if not tertiary. He is popular. He is very reluctant to offend the "sensible center". He is willing to cast the rest of his own party as having historically been extreme, in order to play the moderate. He is sensitive to pressure placed upon him from any direction. He is not known for his positions on foreign policy. He is an educated southerner. He could pass for handsome, in a gubernatorial way. The case could thus be made that he is in fact, Bill Clinton.

There are, however, important differences. As an alleged Republican, he is bound to be somewhat more right-wing than B.C. Bush has shown hopeful signs of willingness to stand up to the N.E.A. There is no trail of strange suicides in his wake, no record of sympathy with hostile foreign powers. His wife is not highly visible. If he wins, the press is not going to let him get away with so much.

Imagine that during a Bush presidency, certain parties note the resemblance, and, unable to resist the perceived opportunities to get even, are drawn into the very traps they laid for Clinton's opposition. Enough turgid fantasy for the time being, I'm all sweaty.

If elected, G.W.B. will not attempt to appoint Bork to the supreme court, as I would. He will not eliminate any cabinet posts or withdraw from the U.N. He is not likely to get anything privatized that ought to be. He will not win the culture war for us. None of this is ever going to be accomplished by a mere Presidential election anyway.

What little we really know about George W. Bush already exceeds what we need to know. It is enough that he can be useful to us if we do what is necessary. Some say that they vote for a man, not for a party. If this was ever a viable option, it hasn't been for some time. For that matter, it is an inherently anti-democratic approach.