As one pundit put it, in rudimentary, if derogatory, terms: “Neocons run the government, and the President runs the fax machine.” As simple as that sounds, it is both complex and troublesome.  Most importantly, it is a dangerous assertion, not only for its verbal attack on the Presidential office itself but unfortunately for its provable accuracy and veiled truth.

Anyone with a glimmer of interest in American politics knows that neocon is a condensed version of neoconservative. Further, those who understand the term, even in an elementary way, know that neoconservatives are leftist-liberals who cloak themselves with the mantle of “republican” to gain political advantage in a republican administration. Donkeys in elephants clothing, as it were. Or more accurately, wolves in sheeps clothing., as we shall see.

The agenda of the neocons who, God help us, are literally running our country and using Bush the Patsy as its front man---most of Bush’s advisors are neocons---is plain and simple: American Empire. Neocons want to make America part of the New World Order---which they will rule.  The methods they use to achieve this is by using our own sovereign political power and military might against us to promote an interventionist foreign policy, urge preemptive war, encourage foreign conquests, squelch dissent, ravage the Constitution, and establish global policing.

Amazing, when you consider that the neocons, who never saw a war they didn’t like, are the same intellectual frauds who dodge military service for themselves and their families---a sort of “let the proles do it” mentality. And the most damaging aspect of all this for America is that while neocons are “serving” as advisors to Bush, the President of the United States for whatever reason, is doing their bidding as any good shill should do.

We better wake up and remedy this lethal, anti-American situation soon if we expect to keep our country free, independent, strong, and in one piece.

Also amazing is the wifely, but misguided, support Laura Bush is giving her husband. Here is a woman apparently bright enough to see and understand what is destroying America; but looking demure and smiling, dutifully gives impetus to her husband’s miserably mishandling of his presidential priorities and responsibilities, by shilling for him.

There is nothing odd about a president having, even expecting, his wife to take his side through good and bad times. She’s not expected to do any heaving lifting, but as a resident cheerleader, a little flag waving on his behalf never hurts. The distaff side of some best-known presidents demonstrates the point: Washington had Martha, Lincoln had Mary Todd, FDR had Eleanor, Kennedy had Jackie, LBJ had Lady Bird, Reagan had Nancy, all strong supportive women.

But Laura Bush makes the song “Stand by your man” sound like the national anthem.

Not long ago, Ellen Goodman of the Boston Globe pinned it down for all to read. But because most concerned citizens either don’t get the Globe, or don’t get to read Goodman, her message was too “on target” not to share the essence of it with you: Bush rode in as president on the “compassionate conservative” band wagon. Then the wheels came off the wagon. George bastardized the true conservative agenda, then took himself off the hook by outsourcing his “compassion” pitch to his spouse.

How is Laura doing? Running over with praise for her bungling man. At one convention she informed the crowd that George’s biggest muscle is his heart. “He’s a loving man with a big heart. I’ve seen tears as he has hugged families who have lost loved ones and talked to anguished parents of Iraq war casualties.”

Goodman tells us that on stump speeches, Laura Bush talks about Afghanistan as a women’s lib success instead of a dangerous war; calls embryonic stem cell research raising false hopes; wishes away questions on same-sex marriage by nebulously declaring “it opens up the debate.”

Laura’s tootsie roll compassion is also reflected in lines like “goodness throughout our land”, and her unshakable, goodie-two-shoes demeanor goes into high gear when she hears that only three out of 10 Americans believe that George Bush has governed compassionately. Laura seems mortified that it isn’t at least 9 out of 10.

Laura’s probable dilemma: how can I promote George with credibility and confidence when the numbers are stacked so low against him? Never mind, if I can’t influence policy, at least I can polish his image.

But, to paraphrase Goodman who so rightly points it out: it takes more than Laura shilling for George while George is shilling for the neocons, to cook up any compassion in this White House.

James T. Moore
http://jamestmoore.us/