Gooseberry on Nixon v Bush

The incredible political mind of Hollywood producer and director Ron Howard has adroitly drawn the connection between the secretive power abuses of Richard Nixon and the bumbling defensive rearguard actions against terrorism of George Bush.

Christening the past eight years as an "imperial presidency" Howard and his associates have climbed onto the Hollywood elite bandwagon where they: 1. assume because they are involved in entertainment that they know anything about real life, and 2. assume the rest of us actually care what they think.

Ironically, there are two professions in the United States that survive solely on the behest, acceptance and blessing of the unwashed masses, namely, politicians and celebrities. Both exist because the rest of us allow them to. And yet too often, once an individual rises to the pinnacle of recognition, they turn on those of us who got them there and consider themselves above anything common (the irony is that there is nothing so common as things popular to the populace, which by their very definitions are celebrities and politicians). They think we are stupid and tacky, but unlike Groucho Marx who honestly refused to be a member of any club that would have him as a member, today's celebrity forgets that we, the stupid and tacky, picked them to be a celebrity.

So how do we distinguish Nixon from Bush? Once again we look to the popular press. Nixon's imperical presidency was created through a group communications process called group think, which is defined as "a pattern of thought characterized by self-deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics." (Merriam Webster) Nixon created a presidential atmosphere where there was no scrutiny, no argument and no opposing opinions. In short, he did everything in the dead of night with a posse of zombies who thought Nixon could do no wrong.

Bush, on the other hand, has not had a moment of peace from critical review since even before he took office (arguably, no other president has suffered from the same scrutiny as has Bush 43). Nothing Bush has done in the name of national security was done in a spirit of self-deception. When he made his first state of the union address after September 11, 2001, he clearly outlined that the road ahead would be hard, and long, and that it would involve actions and reactions that many would not agree with. He also prophetically stated that he would be abandoned by most of the nation before his task was completed. In other words, he has done what he has done knowing full well it would not always be right, but it would be done anyway to keep America safe.

To summarize: Bush is not Nixon. Obama is not the Messiah. Bill Clinton is not Satan. And Ron Howard is not an intelligent political type.