Gore Joins Max in Spending the Surplus

Carl Remick carlremick at hotmail.com
Thu Aug 24 21:57:20 PDT 2000

>A few more speeches like in Iowa (in reference to
>trade, Bush swore he would eliminate 'terriers and
>bailiffs,' or something like that), and the national
>rout will begin. When you're an idiot, it's hard to
>hide it from constant national television surveillance.
>I think this matters more now than w/Reagan because
>in 1980 people were after a few simple things and
>RR addressed their concerns. Now the electorate's
>expectations seem to be different.

In fact, public expectations seem to be different now than they were just a few moments ago. For most of this campaign, Bush was said to have great popular appeal because of his very average-joe-ness (see also Sen. Roman L. Hruska on Nixon Supreme Court nominee G. Harrold Carswell [termed by critics a "legal mediocrity"]: "Even if he were mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. Aren't they entitled to a little representation and a little chance?"). And Bush's claim to that status was enhanced, if anything, by his repeated verbal pratfalls. Then, presto, this asset became a liability. W.'s formerly amusing malaprops become clinical evidence of crippling aphasia rendering him unfit for higher office. How did this happen, did the sheer accumulation of "Bushisms" just reach critical mass and cause W. image meltdown? And even more important, *has* there really been a change in the way the public views W., or is this dunce cap he's wearing just a gift from the media?

Carl _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.

More information about the lbo-talk mailing list