Divided Nation

Head-shaking CNN headlines aside, here is something from the NY Times which to me is a good example of how divided this nation is. Bob Herbert writes:

In January 1945, with World War II still raging, Franklin Roosevelt insisted on a low-key inauguration. Already gravely ill, he began his address by saying, "Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. Vice President, my friends, you will understand and, I believe, agree with my wish that the form of this inauguration be simple and its words brief."

Times have changed. President Bush and his equally tone-deaf supporters spent the past few days partying hard while Americans, Iraqis and others continued to suffer and die in the Iraq conflagration. Nothing was too good for the princes and princesses of the new American plutocracy. Tens of millions of dollars were spent on fireworks, cocktail receptions, gala dinners and sumptuous balls.

---

The disconnect between the over-the-top celebrations in Washington and the hideous reality of Iraq does not in any way surprise me. It's exactly what we should expect from the president and his supporters, who seem always to exist in a fantasy realm far removed from such ugly realities as war and suffering. In that realm you can start wars without having to deal with the consequences of them. You don't even have to pay for them. You can put them on a credit card.

This is right on... when the tsunami hit, a lot of folks made snarky remarks (and rightly so) about the piddling $15 million initial offering of aid and compared it to the obscene amounts of money being spent on his swearing-in ceremonies. However, I am surprised that many of those same people have been silent on the stark contrast between his state and perception of reality and the crisis in Iraq.

Furthermore, everyone prior to the ceremony and address was talking about how Bush would address the need for healing and reconciliation, with the only question being how he would follow through on it. But the message of the day was spreading freedom, and virtually nothing on bringing people together or true bipartisanship. Again, the crickets are chirping... nobody seems to be talking about this omission.

Of course, there are those who wouldn't catch such things even if it walked up and bit them on the ass... from the same pages as Herbert comes Senile Safire:

I rate it among the top 5 of the 20 second-inaugurals in our history.

Uh-huh... only the top 5? Gee, Bill... that must be disappointing for you to have to admit that.

It takes guts to take on that peace-freedom priority so starkly.

What? That's like saying today "I oppose slavery... now where is my medal for bravery?"

Safire aside, most commentators I have read (including some moderates from the right side of the aisle) seem to agree on two things:

1) Bush missed the mark

2) Nobody will remember what he said in his speech in a couple years

But the true Bushies put their blinders on to everything and anything, and simply clap louder in order to try and drown out the noise from car bomb explosions and the lamentations of the downtrodden.

Update: Here is an example of what I am talking about from the Bull Moose (no wimpy liberal he)

Update: Peggy Noonan (!) also slammed Dubya's address...