Saturday, November 29, 2003

Bush haters and the Bush haters who hate Bush and write books about their hatred of Bush

Andrew Ferguson at the Weekly Standard has a nice review and analysis of all the Bush-hating books that have come out lately (just in time for the holidays. Nothing says Merry Christmas like a book calling the president a liar). The piece takes a good look at several of the worst anti-Bush books out there. I agree with Ferguson that some of the left's hatred of Bush is part of a response to the Clinton-haters of the 90's (till present). Its sort of an "oh yeah! I know you are but what am I" response. This is particularly true in the context of calling Bush a liar, as demonstrated by this passage from the article:

"The question is why, and the most obvious possibility is that Bush really is a liar: a liar of astounding dimensions, a liar so vast that his lies overwhelm his standing as oligarch, hypocrite, or idiot. Another possibility suggests a reaction to the Clinton years. Of all the accusations leveled against Clinton, the hardest to refute was that he was a liar. Accusing Bush of the same may thus stand as a rebuttal to Clinton's accusers, since Clinton's lies, we were so often told, were about the trivial matter of an illicit liaison, while Bush's lies are about matters of state. (If only Bush had an illicit liaison to lie about!) As James Carville's ghostwriter cleverly puts it in "Had Enough?", "Democrats lied about something we really like: sex. Republicans lie about something they really like: war and money." Calling Bush a liar is a twofer. It at once underscores the gravity of the present president's misconduct, and it condemns the frivolousness of the previous president's accusers."

Its a pretty good read, and amusing, too. I recommend it.