HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS

Useless-Knowledge.com
Articles


Joe Mariani

You Can Have Cary Grant; I'll Take John Wayne!
Aug 19, 2003

(Title and theme inspired by Kimbal Ross Binder)

I'm finally beginning to understand the left-wing position regarding President George W. Bush -- that is, unrelenting and (to rational thinkers) unearned personal hatred. Most left-wing Liberals seem more concerned with style than substance, especially the limousine variety that seems to lead the mad mob. Jessica Lange said of President Bush, "I find it particularly reprehensible the way he acts like he was in a western". On June 4 2002, Paul Begala said while hosting CNN's Crossfire, "The difference between Martin Sheen and George W. Bush is Martin Sheen is actually convincing when he acts like he's president." Democratic Senator from West Virginia Robert "KKK" Byrd accused President Bush of "assuming the garb of a warrior" when he wore the flight suit necessary to fly in a depressurised airplane. The less-well-known Liberals (I don't want to offend their elitist sensibilities by saying "common Liberals"), when they're not merely parroting their famous cousins, express their hatred of the President by mocking his face or Texas speech patterns and accent. It's becoming clear that they hate President Bush not because he's a bad President, but because he's not a good actor. Alright then... since they seem more concerned with the "image" President Bush displays than his abilities or policy, we'll address that.

Cary Grant was a terrific actor, no doubt about it. He -- meaning his screen persona -- was suave, smooth, debonair, a "ladies' man", and always knew just the right move to make. He knew how to dress and act in any situation. He was fast on his feet without being light in the loafers, one might say. He was engaging, urbane and witty, and knew how to talk his way out of trouble when caught in the most outrageous lies. Just watch the 1959 Hitchcock classic North By Northwest for examples of Cary Grant at his finest.

That's the sort of man Liberals and their tame political pets the Democrats want for their President -- Cary Grant's screen persona. That was why they loved Bill Clinton, and STILL go to incredible lengths to defend his "legacy" against all comers. He was smooth and charming, a "ladies' man" (whether the lady in question was willing or not) with style. That's enough for them. Democratic Senator Bob Kerrey once commented admiringly, "Clinton's an unusually good liar. Unusually good. Do you realize that?" When asked about his statement by a reporter for the Omaha World-Herald, he explained, "It was not an angry comment. It was actually intended as an off- handed compliment." (Sadly, their online archives only go back three weeks. However, you can visit a library and research the 2/5/96 edition.)

John Wayne was in many ways the antithesis of Cary Grant. He -- again, his screen persona -- was gruff, forceful, and rough. The quintessential tough guy preferred taking action against his foes to making a false peace with them. When the going got tough, "the Duke" got going. He was anything but smooth, the opposite of debonair, and his lack of tact was comical. Yet when the bad guys -- whoever they were -- came around, there was no one better to have on your side. John Wayne saw what needed to be done, and did it. As he said in the 1962 movie The Longest Day, "You can't give the enemy a break. Send him to hell." That's the image President Bush conveys, the one that the Liberals mean when they disparagingly refer to him as a "cowboy". They would prefer to have their sophisticated sweet-talking appeaser Bill Clinton back in power... or as close to him as they can get.

In a post-9/11 world, we don't need a smooth- talking charming liar as President. We need an aggressive go-getter who will take the fight to the bad guys and keep it OFF our own turf as much as possible. We need a President who will hold the other countries of the world to their promises. While Liberal Democrats will wring their hands and make pretty speeches about understanding our enemies, a President like George W. Bush will -- and DID -- find and remove first their base, then the cause of their support. Why was Al-Qaeda getting so much support in the Middle East? As Osama warned us outright in a 1998 interview, "The call to wage war against America was made because America has spear-headed the crusade against the Islamic nation, sending tens of thousands of its troops to the land of the two Holy Mosques." Keeping foreign troops in Saudi Arabia gave the fanatics a cause to rally around for support. Why were those troops there? To protect the region from and enforce the sanctions against Saddam. Moving the troops out while Saddam was still in power would have removed the last flimsy restriction on him, and proved that he and Osama were right -- that America was only a joke, a paper tiger to be ignored at will. Is THAT the "world opinion" of us the Liberals are so upset about losing? Good riddance to a false image.

As a result of the liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq, the world is already on its way to becoming a better place. Both of those countries are no longer controlled by brutal, sadistic, repressive regimes. Neither country is a blatant and open haven for terrorists. Before you work yourself up to a nice case of frothing outrage, remember that these countries are in the Mid-East, not the Midwest. No one could reasonably expect Baghdad, Iraq to be as "tame" as Bagdad, Arizona yet -- that will take years. Saudi Arabia has begun to crack down on its terrorist problem. Israel and the Palestinian Authority have agreed to really work at peace, and have a chance of success for the first time, following the Bush "roadmap" (though Hamas still seems to enjoy a special protection from dismantlement, in my opinion). North Korea stopped trying to bully the US into unilateral talks by threatening the world with nuclear weapons. The demand for a more democratic government is strengthening every day in Iran. Of course there are rough spots. Of course we may sometimes take two steps back for every three forward. Of course we civilians won't get to see everything that goes on behind the scenes right away -- or maybe not ever in some cases. Of course removing the threats to the world isn't going to be easy, or quick, or safe. No one ever said it would be. If you're one of those people demanding fast, easy, safe solutions so you can get back to your shallow, superficial, self-centered world of image and style over substance, I suggest getting treatment for that attention deficit disorder. We're at war, pilgrim.



------------

Email Joe Mariani: CavalierX@yahoo.com

Comment on this column in the forum.

Tell a friend about this site!

------------

Useless-Knowledge.com © Copyright 2002-2003. All rights reserved.