Tuesday, January 20, 2009

The sad people

From Dailykos:
Cruising around wingnut hangouts, it appears the new talking point is that liberals set out to destroy Bush from Day One because we didn't see him as legitimate, so it's time for payback. Or something. Here's Rush, for example:

I disagree fervently with the people on our side of the aisle who have caved and who say, "Well, I hope he succeeds. We've got to give him a chance." Why? They didn't give Bush a chance in 2000. Before he was inaugurated the search-and-destroy mission had begun.

Yeah, we can play "who started this first" by pointing to the VRWC's effort to destroy Bill Clinton from the very start of his presidency. But whatever. It's true that we didn't see Bush as legitimate. When you steal an election, people tend to get angry.

Yet that angry left was all but ignored, with the media going to great lengths to hide the anti-Bush inauguration protests from the viewing public. The press was happy to fĂȘte Bush from the very beginning, through 9/11, and all through the 2004 election cycle. Mission accomplished! Yet in the end, a bunch of pissed off activist liberals didn't derail Bush. He derailed himself.

So now a bunch of pissed off conservatives want to deliver payback. They're angry! Yeah, whatever. There's a difference between entering office after stealing an election, and entering office after a massive landslide victory (ask Reagan). Their anger is the anger of the fringe, of the 20+ percent that still approves of George Bush. No one cares about them anymore.

Bottom line -- Obama will either succeed or fail based on his own actions, not based on whether angry conservatives like him from Day One.

No comments: