Civility, 2007-Style: Hanging George Bush
Some people who are outraged by anti-Obama placards have forgotten that, only a few years ago, many people were condemning George Bush in terms as harsh or harsher.
Here is a picture I took at an antiwar rally in Washington in January 2007. The sign – “What’s good for the goose….. gandar” – refers to the recent hanging of Saddam Hussein had been hung after a kangaroo trial. (Saddam was guilty as hell of many things, but the trial process was a disgrace to the United States and to Iraq). The Bush administration was in such a sweat to use the Saddam trial to influence the US congressional midterm elections that the Iraqi government announced Hussein’s sentence – death by hanging – even before they had officially released the sentence (which was not released until after the US election).
The artist’s representation of George Bush could have been better, but so could the photograph itself. Some people may have been offended by the title I added to the photo: “Bush Swings by Congress.” (The full size version of the photograph is available at my Flickr site
No one has forgotten this. What you are observing is widespread internalization of racial and political double standards.
“Some people who are outraged by anti-Obama placards have forgotten that, only a few years ago, many people were condemning George Bush in terms as harsh or harsher.”
Sorry, Jim, but you’re playing the moral relativism card a bit wildly here.
When people used ‘harsh terms’ about Bush, it was, as you yourself point out in your piece, because he actually – was – doing the things he was accused of.
The Tea Bag Klan, on the other hand, are directing crazy accusations against Obama that have no grounding whatsoever in reality.
Those two things are not the same thing. Reality isn’t something you can take or leave to make a false equivalence.
The sooner honest conservatives recognise that, the sooner you can start taking back you Party from the extremists who are currently wearing its carcass as a shroud.
“When people used ‘harsh terms’ about Bush, it was, as you yourself point out in your piece, because he actually – was – doing the things he was accused of.”
What, we’ve pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan and the PATRIOT Act has been repealed?
icr –
What exactly is the point you think you’re making?
The Obama Administration didn’t invade Iraq under false pretences and turn it into the world’s most dangerous freefire-zone, that was the Bush Administration.
The Obama Administration didn’t hand over the levers of power in Afghanistan to a bunch of corrupt narco-pols and warlords, that was the Bush Administration.
And the Obama Administration didn’t drive the travesty that is the PATRIOT Act through Congress and into law, that was the Bush Administration as well.
You would appear to be – trying – to imply that the people protesting all these things back in 2007 didn’t – really – oppose them, because they’re not now marching in the street demanding that the Obama Administration hasn’t snapped its fingers and made it all go away.
In which case, I’d just point out that the people protesting back then went to the polls a year later voted for a change in policy, and their guy won. So instead of having to march through the streets to make their voices heard, they now have other avenues through which to apply pressure. Which they’re doing.
There’s no contradiction there.
The idea that one can justify “torture Bush” paraphernalia from 2007 on the grounds that it was some sort of last resort doesn’t fly. You can find photos of “Bush Nazi” placards on line that date back to at least 2003.
If you want to say that Bush’s actions and planned actions were worse — fine. But protestors against Bush and his policies did sink to the same lows that current anti-Obama protestors do — and one really didn’t have to wait very long for things to get ugly in either case.