Death of a Presidency
Posted on December 7th, 2006 in Uncategorized | 4 Comments »
Perhaps as much as the mid-term elections, yesterday marked a symbolic end to the Bush presidency. The reason? Two otherwise unrelated events: the release of the Iraq Study Group report and the announcement that Mary Cheney, Dick Cheney’s lesbian daughter, is pregnant.
Along with new defense secretary Robert Gates, the Iraq panel confirms that U.S. policy in Iraq “is not working,” as if we needed a group of Washington wise men (and one woman) to confirm that.
Reviews of the panel’s work vary, as might be expected. In the Times, David Sanger writes…
In unusually sweeping and blunt language, the panel of five Republicans and five Democrats issued 79 specific recommendations.
But in Slate, Fred Kaplan calls those recommendations “an amorphous, equivocal grab bag.”
Doesn’t matter. The pundits can fight out the details. In terms of public perception, we now have an esteemed group of the sage saying that Bush’s Iraq war is a failure. The White House is now perhaps the only holdout in this conclusion. It has become borderline irrelevant in the debate on what to do in Iraq.
As for Mary Cheney’s pregnancy…well, isn’t it delicious? The daughter of a vice-president in an administration which wants to ban gay marriage is a lesbian, has been with her partner for 15 years, and is pregnant.
“This,” the Washington Post writes with what must be a chuckle, “is the first child for both.”
The Times reports that Dana Perino, a spokeswoman for Mr. Bush, said that Mr. Cheney had recently told the president about the pregnancy and that âthe president said he was happy for him.â
Wouldn’t you love to have been a fly on the wall during that conversation?
“Mr. President, remember that daughter I have…?”
The point is that Bush is not only losing the military war in Iraqâby the way, 10 American soldiers were killed in Iraq yesterdayâhe is losing the culture war here at home.
The anti-gay policies of the Bush administration have always been driven more by politics than by sincerity. (I don’t know if this makes them more or less repellent.)
Now there are no more elections in which Karl Rove can use homophobia to whip up fear/support for President Bush. Mary Cheney’s pregnancy could have a profound cultural impact; the culture war won’t end, but its politics have just become considerably more complicated. And, in any case, we can expect that the Bush administration’s attempts to build support by exploiting homophobia just ended once and for all.
Incidentally, do you think that Mary Cheney waited to announce her pregnancyâwaited, indeed, to get pregnantâuntil this last election was over, or close enough?
It wouldn’t surprise me a bit…. She too knows that GWB is nearing his expiration date.
4 Responses
12/7/2024 11:12 am
The president doesn’t give a hoot personally about gay marriage, nor does Karl Rove. His views are strictly utilitarian on that point.
12/7/2024 1:17 pm
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to oppose “official” gay marriage (provided all the same rights are afforded) and have no other problem with homosexuality. Liberals insist on grouping issues to make a point, and the point often suffers for it. If you want to group these issues, let me ask you this, if you believe two consenting same-sex adults should have the right to wed, how about three or more consenting adults entering into a plural marriage? It seems to me you cannot be for one and not the other, though I’m sure plenty of liberals would not dare support legalizing plural marriage.
12/10/2024 12:28 am
oh my you’re insane. lets see, liberals are bad, but they’re chicken. so, dream up something really icky and challenge them. “plural marriage”! ok, i’m a liberal, i’ll take the bait. oh my god, plural marriage, plural marriage! help help the sky is falling.
do you have any idea how fun group sex is? that’s all we did in the 70s you bonehead! plural marriage? no problemo, chucky. better put that thinking cap back on. (and let me make another suggestion: rent The Jerk.
12/10/2024 1:13 pm
Oh, impressive response…how could I possibly disagree with you? You can almost see the spittle hitting the computer screen as you have your fit, the Alec Baldwin approach to debate-make a fool of yourself and you must mean what you say.
I know it’s hard for you to imagine because you’re probably too far gone, but using the 70s as backup for any argument is a phenomenally bad idea. And there’s nothing “icky” about any of this, just a simple question about your idea of individual rights. And you respond with “wave your freak flag.” What a novel attitude that was thirty years before it became pathetic. But the older you get, the more that makes you look like an imbecile.