The pseudo-Libertarian Reformation

Saturday, April 29, 2006

Picking up the trash

It has survived a preemptive attack based on “faulty intelligence.”

It has endured rhetoric ranging from “tyrannical” to “incompetent.”

It has even remained resilient through “thousands of tactical errors.”

What, you ask, is it?

It is my unwavering loyalty to the Bush Administration. But to be honest, in light of recent events, it’s wearing quite thin.

When President Bush offered his rationale for invading Iraq, it sounded logical—or at the very least, defendable: protecting the American people, liberating an impoverished society, seeking justice—sounded like a fairly patriotic platform.

And when the left callously taunted and mocked the Commander in Chief, there I was, standing by his side, taking jabs and uppercuts for the good of the cause. And after all the scrutiny, harboring no ill feelings, I’m still standing by the President on Iraq, as I turn into a garbage can for the entire liberal faction to dump their baggage, their soiled smear of lies and deception.

While the War on Terror certainly tested the allegiance of every Bush loyalist, and called for a degree of latitude and trust in the President, most ardent Bush followers stood firm, stubbornly discrediting liberal propagandists whilst zealously advocating the administration’s agenda.

However, when word of alleged unwarranted wiretappings of American citizens hit the headlines, dedication and advocacy morphed into distrust and vexation, and separated true Bush supporters from quasi, halfhearted frauds.

The President’s rationale was quite simple, despite its poor elucidation: tapping calls to or from the Middle East is not only justified, but necessary to the ongoing, ever intensifying, War on Terror. And, like virtually every major moral issue, the right wing bought into Bush’s theory while the left wing griped about civil liberty violations.

But still, despite a growing anti-Bush movement from the left, screams of impeachment from the far left, and even whispers of dissention within the conservative confines, there I was, standing firm, collecting more smear, filling my garbage bag with more propaganda and half-baked, ill-conceived glut, with my ever resilient devotion to the most powerful man in the free world left wholly intact, sporting only a few minor tarnishes and oil stains.

It wasn’t until the President announced a deal that would hand over major port operations to an Arab company based in a country that formerly recognized the Taliban that my loyalty began to dwindle, as I found myself questioning the integrity and competency of the Bush administration.

For the first time, an administration whose strong suit has always been security—when all else fails, play the defense card—now finds themselves on the short end of the stick, trailing in a battle they cannot afford to lose.

According to some polls, four out of five Republicans dissented with Bush on the Dubai ports deal and one would be hard-pressed to find a Democrat vouching for the President. The American people spoke their minds, and rightfully persuaded the termination of this ludicrous and potentially devastating deal.

A brief but disturbingly soundless calm sunk in after the ports deal debacle ceased its thunderous reverberations. Having not stirred controversy in, oh, about two weeks, the Bush administration was relatively serene, as were the clamoring dogs of the left wing, usually hooting and hollering about some impulsive “travesty” against America, instead found uncharacteristically fastening their scarcely used muzzles.

But this tranquility was short lived, proving to be nothing more than the eye of the storm, as a debate loomed that would shake the groundwork of the nation, force politicians to take fiercely divided sides, and incite thousands to rise in protest.

Previously at the end of the bill docket, astray from the buzz of everyday politics, nothing more than a lingering afterthought, with so many other issues stealing the limelight, immigration and border security were covertly slipping by undetected, temporarily.

While most Democrats seemed united in their effort to legalize currently illegal immigrants from Mexico and Canada, Republicans, thanks in large part to Bush, were split on their party platform. Most of the GOP wanted stringent border security, with some even calling for a prodigious and expensive wall to be built along the Mexican border. And while Bush generally shared the same sentiment regarding border security, he dissented on the issue of legalization, taking a quasi-liberal approach with his proposed guest workers program—essentially, amnesty. GOP leaders in the House and Senate took a more strict approach, advocating a more rigorous citizenship process than the Democrats had proposed—and this, naturally, caused internal strife in the GOP.

When proposing legislation, especially in an election year, policy-makers seeking re-election must be sensitive, or risk losing votes from a certain demographic. This is why GOP leaders in the House and Senate concocted such a lax program that probably doesn’t reflect their true beliefs, for fear of damaging their fragile reputation within the Hispanic community.

A similar concept also applies: guilt by association. Congressmen, whether Republican or Democrat, simply don’t want to be associated with the President. They shudder when they see the President’s deplorable approval ratings and thus they strive to separate themselves from the Commander in Chief. And while Democrats feast on the endless fodder provided to them by the GOP, Republicans scramble to mesh together and form a solid platform to campaign from, thanks, again, to Mr. Bush.

With most Republicans, even hardliners, running away from the foul stench of the Bush administration over the ports deal, there I was, with my black bag stretched to its capacity, picking up defecation of foul intolerance, whose origin is indiscernible, a noxious combination of Republican and Democrat, when, somewhere along the line, I found myself wondering if it was all worth while: whether my supposed loyalty was true and unwavering, or just a pretense of pity, cowering behind a wall of deceit.

Seeking to mitigate a newfound distrust in the President, I found little comfort when the latest energy crisis hit the wires. Akin to security, energy is believed to be one of the GOP’s stronger platforms—the big-oil sympathizers aren’t supposed to lose the energy fight to the anarchical left. But Bush’s failure to elucidate a clear, concise message, other than the obvious expulsion of our “addiction” to foreign oil, has left the rest of the GOP floundering to unite, thus leaving the door wide open for the environmental left to swoop in and steal the show—blaming the Republican led Congress and the Republican President for high gas prices, and our stingingly evil “addiction” to foreign oil.

And that, the administration’s inability to effectively communicate with their constituents, facilitate the flow of information to the people, and illuminate a clear mission statement, is why Bush’s policies, more recently, are a step behind the competition, resulting in a bogged down, hampered GOP, compliments of the Commander in Chief.

But, maybe, just maybe, there is a silver lining. The recent shuffling of figure heads in the administration, from Chief of Staff Andrew Card’s resignation, to Press Secretary Scott McClellan’s ousting, a void filled by Fox News anchor Tony Snow, might improve press relations. But again, emphasis on the maybe.

Just a point of clarification: in no way should my opinions be interpreted as anti-conservative—my “crossing over” with John Edwards from the right to the left—my political convictions are as conservative and capitalistic as they’ll ever be. That will never change. Rather, my mere loyalty to America’s leader is what is in question—and don’t think for a second that every Republican supports, or should support, their Republican President, because that notion is simply irrational. The fact of the matter is that Bush is acting way out of character, atypically straddling the line between Democrat and Republican, and that is the infuriating part.

Though my faith in the President endured the Iraq controversy, wiretapping criticism, and the Dubai debacle, it was clearly eroding. And Bush’s mishandling of immigration policy and energy have all but destroyed any hope of undoing the corrosion—my once durable garbage bag finally shattered into a heaping glop of gunk, along with my loyalty.

So here I am, with my torn garbage bag, frayed and tattered from all the controversy, its components splattered across the political landscape, reeking of treachery, corruption and duplicity, permeating the depths of the American mind, leaving a permanent mark of incompetence and ineptitude that will take years to eradicate, I ask myself a simple question: do I bend over and pick up the grime, as I always have, or do I finally remove the mask that has blinded me from reality? The decision is mine, but the outcome matters not, for as long as George W. Bush is in office, and an intellectual conservative mind is not, this great country will continue to tear itself apart, leaving the American people to pick up the trash.