The Cheney administration has so damaged this country that I occasionally find it hard to see the bright spots.
One positive sign seems to be the country's collective understanding that Bush is a managed, monitored product. When he gets off-script, all kinds of bad things come out of his mouth and it often degenerates into babbling.
Now, for the right, it generally doesn't matter one whit that this is so. Cheney puppet, dumbass, or God-complex; whatever the President is, he's theirs and they stick by him no matter how dangerous or stupid his policies become. But at least the blowhards on the right don't try pass such bullshit as his "genuiness" or "honesty" anymore. It's a circus act and we all know it.
What is even more pathetic is the capons in the White House press that fawn over Bush and subjugate themselves to his handlers. This is what corporatism gives you, just as sure government controlled media: a pliant media, filled with literal and figurative tools.
Bush loves our pathetic media so much, it is fascinating to read what happens when someone barely stands up to him. Unfortunately, it takes a European journalist; because no one here wants to find their Hill party invitations suddenly scarce.
"She estimated that I had interrupted the president eight times and added that I had upset him. I was upset too, I told her. The line started to break up; I was in a basement with a bad phone signal. I took her number and agreed to call her back. I dialled the White House number and she was on the line again.
“I’m here with Colby,” she indicated.
“You were given an opportunity to interview the leader of the free world and you blew it,” she began.
I was beginning to feel as if I might be dreaming. I had naively believed the American president was referred to as the “leader of the free world” only in an unofficial tongue-in-cheek sort of way by outsiders, and not among his closest staff.
“You were more vicious than any of the White House press corps or even some of them up on Capitol Hill . . .The president leads the interview,” she said.
“I don’t agree,” I replied, my initial worry now turning to frustration. “It’s the journalist’s job to lead the interview.”
It was suggested that perhaps I could edit the tapes to take out the interruptions, but I made it clear that this would not be possible."