“Throughout that long, stately, overtelevised week in early June, items would appear in the newspaper discussing the Republicans’ eagerness to capitalize (subtly, tastefully) on the outpouring of affection for my father and turn it to Bush’s advantage for the fall election. The familiar “Heir to Reagan” puffballs were reinflated and loosed over the proceedings like (subtle, tasteful) Mylar balloons… People were treated to a side-by-side comparisonï¿½Ronald W. Reagan versus George W. Bushï¿½and it’s no surprise who suffered for it.”
Considering the current President’s opposition to stem cell research, which many (including former First Lady Nancy) hope may provide a cure for Alzheimer’s, the Reagans not being fans of Bush Jr. is hardly that surprising.
What is surprising is that Ronald Reagan’s son would write a long article for Esquire about what he doesn’t like about George W Bush. This is, considering the source, biting, and should be read by as many Americans who plan to vote Republican (thinking that somehow this makes them good patriots) as possible:
“The Bush administration can’t be trusted. The parade of Bush officials before various commissions and committeesï¿½Paul Wolfowitz, who couldn’t quite remember how many young Americans had been sacrificed on the altar of his ideology; John Ashcroft, lip quivering as, for a delicious, fleeting moment, it looked as if Senator Joe Biden might just come over the table at himï¿½these were a continuing reminder. The Enron creeps, tooï¿½a reminder of how certain environments and particular habits of mind can erode common decency. People noticed. A tipping point had been reached. The issue of credibility was back on the table. The L-word was in circulation. Not the tired old bromide liberal. That’s so 1988. No, this time something much more potent: liar.”
(With thanks to Scratch & Sniff, which I came across entirely by accident earlier this evening.)