They Frightened Us So Badly
As a rule I love history and political science, and although US history is rife with many regrettable and shameful episodes they’ve never bothered me, it was stuff the country had to go through (slavery) and generally Americans try hard to be a good people. But there is one episode of American history that will likely always baffle me and leave me cold with shame and dread: the election of George Bush in 2004.
Bush was not re-elected, the Supreme Court stole 2000 for him, and I was positive with all my soul the worst president of all time would never see a second term. He was always excused for letting 9/11 happen on his watch, but surely starting a war for lies would doom him.
As we all tragically know election 2004 did not turn out that way, and I still don’t have an answer as to why. Reading Dan Froomkin today in the Washington Post one comes across five writers and their “legacy” thoughts on Bush, where Joseph L Galloway says Americans became frightened.
Frightening us into re-electing George Bush, even after we knew that he was anything but presidential, anything but intelligent…
Remember those lovely terror alerts, the different color zones of fear? They vanished after the election, but did they really work to the level of frightening citizens into voting for George Bush, even though it was widely known he started a war for lies? I don’t buy it; it’s part of the answer, but not all of it.
Some say Kerry had serious problems with his own stance on the war (plus the little fact he voted for it) and therefore could not be an effective opponent. I can see some of that too, but not nearly enough to warrant any citizen voting for Bush.
Nationalism? The country is at war and it’s not wise to change presidents in the middle of a war. Maybe.
I don’t know, I doubt I ever will. By far Bush’s election in 2004 is the most disquieting element of US history I’ve ever studied, and even if I ever did get a real answer I know I wouldn’t like it anyway.