Scathing Bush Commentary

NO CHILD LEFT BEHINDWhat the President says, what the President does
By Katie McKy RAW STORY COLUMNIST

Culture of life. No child left behind. Compassionate conservatism. Christian. These are the descriptors I remember as I watch what remains of New Orleans.

Because I want to be compassionate, I try to believe the best of people. And I do believe that most people want to be good. So I’m going to believe the best of the prez and his gang. I’m going to assume that the prez is not a bad man. Rather, I’ll assume that he’s an ignorant man.

Sure, he attended Phillips Academy. Via a legacy admission, he graduated from Yale. He got an M.B.A. from Harvard Business School. On paper, he seems to be educated. But his words and actions suggest ignorance. Although he might not know what malapropism means, he manufactures them. And while his words might amuse, dismay or embarrass us, his ignorance of action is deadly.

Now, there is an explanation other than ignorance. It’s possible that he’s pathological. Bush could be America’s Nero. Legend says that Nero played the fiddle while Rome burned. Well, before the Towers burned, GW also played: he vacationed. Although he was warned that Al Qaeda would pirate planes and make them into missiles, in August of 2001, Bush took a break.
Then, while Hurricane Katrina grew, Bush played again. Even as the people of New Orleans drowned and died of thirst, perhaps Bush played. For 3 days, Bush, our seeming neo-Nero, was still down on the ranch. For those 3 days, I don’t know what he did. Perhaps he did whatever faux-ranchers do. Did he cut brush and ride his bike while New Orleans drowned?

But I’m going to assume the best of our prez. I’m going to assume that he has a conscience. If there were such a thing as a moral autopsy, I suspect that a serial killer and a corporate raider would only have a hole instead of a conscience.

Perhaps Bush’s conscience is 3 sizes too small, but let’s assume something is there.Let’s assume that the prez that said, “No Child Left Behind,” didn’t intend to leave children behind in New Orleans. Let’s assume that he didn’t intend to have bodies bobbing in the water.
Let’s further assume that Bush believes that government doesn’t work well, that he truly believes it’s too thick with bureaucracy to economically attend to citizens and their concerns. And that Bush wanting less government and an ongoing occupation of Iraq isn’t about keeping the rich rich…and it isn’t about oil.

Let’s be like Christ or Buddha or Mohammed and assume the best of Bush. Now, we know that Bush was warned of the likelihood of a levee being breached. And we know that Bush dismantled federal infrastructure, drawing funds from key organizations such as the Army Corps of Engineers, to fund the Army and its occupation.

So, Bush stayed down on the ranch because he believes that communities cannot only fend for themselves, but fend best for themselves—and that churches and neighbors are more efficient than federal bureaucracies. His actions support such assumptions.

But here’s the deal. Whether he likes the arrangement or not, the prez controls matchless resources. No other person has ever had access to such wealth. And whereas his intellect might not warrant such resources, he’s got ‘em. He ran for office. He took the office. He vowed to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

The first sentence of the Constitution charges a president with forming “a more perfect Union,” establishing “Justice,” insuring “domestic Tranquility,” providing “for the common defence (sic),” and promoting “the general Welfare.” The Constitution describes these things as the “Blessings of Liberty.”

We, the people, gave Bush resources to apply them in time of need. But he didn’t. For days, he settled for assuring that the troops and trucks were coming. But he didn’t do his duty. His sworn duty. He didn’t step off the ranch for “the general Welfare” of poor Americans. Neither did Cheney, who also vacationed. Or Rice, who shopped for snazzy shoes. Bush didn’t even differentiate lethal incompetence from praiseworthy performance (“Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job.”). And people died.

Now, I have a plan for Bush. I was a teacher. Some kids entered my room ignorant. They behaved as if they were free of duty. Thus, they would hurt others, by sins of commission or omission. I didn’t assume that they were pathologically evil. I assumed that they were ignorant.
When they erred, they had to redress what they did and whom they hurt. For example, one of my students threw a rock at a passing truck. I assumed that he didn’t know any better. So I walked him down to the trucking firm. I had him look for a dented trailer. He couldn’t find it. So I had him talk to one of their managers and work out a way to redress the damage that he did. While other kids played at recess, this child emptied trashcans and ran as a gofer.

When he returned, he was ignorant no more. Going for this and that, he learned about the people that ran the trucking firm. He learned a little about trucking: enough to respect it. And he never again tossed a rock at a passing truck.And I suggest the same for the prez. I expect Bush, as the most vacationing president of all time, will take another break, another recess from his duties. Rather than retire to his ranch and dine on chichi presidential food, let him shovel muck from houses. That muck will be there for a long time. It’ll outlast his appetite for work.
Give the man a chance to understand the cost of ignorance, of ignoring reports of insufficient levies and ignoring pleas for help. It will not redress what he did not do, but it might lessen his ignorance.

Or consider dispensing a short lesson in the costs of ignorance. Let him dig graves.