Blonde
Sagacity
The Conservative that Liberals Hate
to Love
Interview II
When one party has the White House, everyone anticipates some
sort of partisanship from the opposition party. However, during the
Bush administration, the levels of such fierce partisanship from
Democrats have reached absurd proportions. The president has been
constantly bashed and accused of just about everything under the
sun.
National Summary has asked Ala of the popular web site, Blonde
Sagacity, to give her assessment about such ridicule and scorn that
have been heaped upon the president.
Web Site:
Blonde Sagacity
Q. Everyone expects a
president to be hounded by the opposition party during their
administration. But when Bush took office, Democrats and
especially Hollywood routinely portrayed him as a dimwitted
idiot. Bush has an MBA from Harvard and flew jet fighters in the
Air National Guard, so how and why do you think he ended up with
this inaccurate and unfair caricature of himself when his
administration began?
The President had a few shots against him even before the
debacle of the 2000 election. The manufactured "out of touch"
image that the press gave his father, his party boy past and the
DUI charge. After the perceived witch hunt the left accused
Republicans of initiating with Clinton they were salivating when
this information was released.
Liberals have used all these
characterizations ad nauseum because it's easier to just call
someone “dumb” than to actually debate the merits of an
ideology.
Q. After 9-11 and especially after the Republican victories
in the 2002 elections, Democrats, Hollywood, and Liberal
bloggers now depict Bush as evil. For instance, he is going to
create a repressive government and wreck havoc across the world.
How and why do you think Bush ended up with this dark sinister
caricature, especially if the same people thought that he was
supposed to be stupid and unintelligent?
Your question says it all. How can someone be stupid and
maniacally evil at the same time? I honestly believe that some
people have a need to rebel and even if Kerry was in office, the
same people would still be complaining at how things were being
run. Once again, it's easier to vilify and belittle than to
offer plausible solutions.
Q. Democrats expected the Republican Party to take a big hit
in the 2002 elections. That didn’t happen. They also expected
Bush to handily lose the 2004 elections and for the Republican
Party to also take a beating in the House and Senate. Again,
that didn’t happen. By consistently depicting Bush as either
stupid or evil, do you feel that Democrats have a very poor
understanding of the president as well as the people who vote
for him?
Maybe, but more importantly I feel that most on the far left are
a bit out-of-touch with the average American. They live in urban
areas and socialize with like-minded people, attend like-minded
schools and watch Bill Maher. They believe that America feels
exactly the same way Manhattan or Los Angeles does and they have
found out in the last two elections that that just isn't the
case. Even when conservatives are mad at Bush, they're mad
because he's not being conservative enough.
Q. In a previous interview with National Summary, you stated:
"The media
has been very hard on Bush and that's evident in the things you
hear people saying when you're standing in line in stores. I
have heard the wildest claims and those ideas aren't coming out
of thin air."
Why do you think that so many people have such an outrageous
and negative impression of the president, like him being evil or
stupid?
It's everywhere. Above the fold almost everyday in the NYT, on
Saturday Night Live, CNN, MSNBC and even on MTV when you have
people like Moby and Eminem out there. The phenomenon reminds me
of that game kids play when they're little: Pass it on. One
person says something about Bush, they tell their wife at
dinner, their kid tells someone at school and so on. Pretty
soon it's "the truth".
Liberals think the right is whining and
exaggerating when we talk about the media bias out there, but
look at them froth at the mouth over Fox News Channel. We have
ONE station when they have everything else and there are over 50
website dedicated to exposing the FNC “bias”. Please.
Q. The press printed an enormous number of outrageous
accusations by Democrats about Bush. For instance, he was going
to institute the draft, etc. What role do you think that the
press has since many of those absurd accusations have never come
to light?
The Draft rumor -started by Charlie Rangel even though HE was
actually the one proposing the bill – really hurt Bush. High
School students really took that to heart and were scared. I
have given up expecting the press to report responsibly.
I know Oprah isn't "traditional press",
but when she didn't correct Cameron Diaz for insinuating that
rape would be legalized if Bush was elected I knew that all
perspective had been lost.
Q. Michael Moore had a huge impact on the way that some
people perceived Bush. Do you see this happening for future
presidential campaigns if Michael Moore releases more
documentaries?
Michael Who?
I think Moore is only in it for the
money. I believe he will actively capitalize on any situation
that presents itself whether a Republican or Democrat is in the
office.
Q. I find it very troubling that so many people see
everything as Bush’s fault, from the levee’s breaking in New
Orleans to miners dying in mine shafts. But the part that
concerns me the most is this perception that the federal
government is supposed to anticipate and solve every local
problem in the country. Do you feel that this “blame” is just
more cheap partisanship or are there plenty of people who really
want the federal government (like the nanny state of socialism)
to have so much more control and influence in every aspect of
our daily lives?
This is another situation where I believe that people would be
blaming whoever was in office. I'm not saying that they aren't
reveling in the fact that it is Bush in office through all of
this, but we have a very large segment of the society that lives
in "victim mode". They call Bush dumb, yet insinuate he can
control the weather. I never cease to be amazed.
Q. In the 2000 election, Al Gore consistently exaggerated his
accomplishments (inventing the Internet, etc) and in the 2004
election, John Kerry constantly flip-flopped on many key issues
(voting for funding the Iraqi war before voting against it,
etc). Both men committed glaring gaffes but they never turned
into big sensational stories in the press. On the other hand,
Bush has had to defend himself on almost every front, like his
whereabouts in the National Guard, etc. In regard to
presidential elections, do you think that Gore and Kerry got a
“free ride” from the press and do you see this happening in the
future?
The conservative blogs did a great job during the last election
cycle in righting (literally) the mistakes the MSM published or
let slide. I hope the importance of the blogs (an actual free
press) will continue to grow and counter the evident bias.
Q. During the Clinton administration, I remember constantly
reading glowing reports from the media on how well the economy
was doing as many other positive stories of that time. Somehow,
I don’t see that happening today from the press even though the
economy has consistently done well in the past couple of years,
low mortgage rates have put more people into their own houses as
never before, domestic terrorist strikes have been thwarted, low
unemployment, low crime, etc. Do you think that the media is not
reporting the same way today that they did during the Clinton
Administration?
Most definitely. Each time a story reports a positive aspect of
the economy (especially in the NYT) they have three
counterpoints that belittle the success. Minority home owner
rates are at an all time high in this country, but if they
report that they make sure to add that people are so far in debt
there may be high foreclosures in the future. This is something
that people know without the media though. People know when
they're working, when all their friends are working and when
they are able to afford luxury items. There's nothing the media
can do about that.
Q. We have been saturated with news reports about the oil
connections of Dick Cheney and the Bush family. However, Senator
Hillary Clinton has recently been bashing Wal-Mart for not
providing more health benefits to their employees even though
she sat on Wal-Mart’s board of directors for six years. The
Walton family has actually played a very big role in Bill and
Hillary Clinton’s political careers yet that is hardly ever
reported by the media. Do you see a double standard by the press
especially if Hillary becomes the 2008 Democratic nominee?
I pray that Hillary is the 2008 nominee. That would be the worst
thing the DNC could ever do for their party and the BEST thing
they could do for the right side of the blogosphere.
We want your opinion! Tell us what you thought about
this article. Click the
Your Feedback menu item to send us
your comments.
