PDS — still the State of our Union

Posted on Wednesday 24 January 2007

From Ruth Marcus in the Washington Post:

If George W. Bush proposes something, it must be bad. Such is the knee-jerk state of partisan suspiciousness that when the president actually endorses a tax increase — a tax increase that would primarily hit the well-off, no less — Democrats still howl.

Such is the level of distrust that when the president finally disavows the free lunch and comes up with a program not financed with deficit spending — indeed, one that would actually bring in extra revenue as the years go on — Democrats still howl.

Who cares what “it” is? If it’s coming from Bush, it’s wrong. Period.

How funny. In the days leading up to last night’s SOTU address, I’ve been thinking exactly the same thing.    Of course, the same thing is true from some quarters about all things Clinton, so there’s really nothing new here.

We’re just seeing the ongoing symptoms of PDS (President Derangement Syndrome).

Myself, I’m getting pretty bored with it.

  1.  
    January 24, 2007 | 5:36 pm
     

    I agree to a degree, Poli. But as Marcus also said:

    This sad situation is largely of Bush’s own making. He is reaping the poisonous state of affairs that he helped sow for six years. So many of the president’s policies have been dishonest and wrongheaded, so much of his politics has been slashingly partisan, Democrats would be crazy if their instinctive reaction to a Bush plan for fill-in-the-blank wasn’t intense distrust.

    That’s a lot of the problem.

    As for his healthcare idea, I think it would help a lot of folks, but only those who have the bucks to lay out in the first place then are able to wait til the tax credit helps them out.

    For my family, this is a non-starter. There’s no insurance here in our household and there’s no way that we can manage it no matter what, so a tax credit isn’t really gonna help us one bit.

    I do appreciate what you’re saying though, and also think that Marcus made some excellent points. It’s just not enough for him to say this at this late date, and expect after all the other lies that anyone’s going to believe his heart’s in the right place.

    It’s too bad. It really is.

  2.  
    January 24, 2007 | 7:54 pm
     

    Slate –

    I truly believe that if we’re going to close the channels of communication, the next two years will be worse, not better. It’s a loooong way still until 2008 (my little backwardsbush counter tells me we have 726 days to go…).

    The tax proposal isn’t a panacaea; it isn’t going to solve the problem of those who, like you, or many other of my friends, can’t afford health insurance at all. But it’s an opening for a dialogue.

    Be mad at this administration? Sure. Lots of folks are. But cut off all discussions because of it? It’s counterproductive.

    I hear what you’re saying — I’m sure you know that. But we can’t just kick the ball down the field for another two years.

  3.  
    January 25, 2007 | 11:10 am
     

    I couldn’t agree more re:lack of discussion is counterproductive.

    I fear the whole thing boils down to the old “fool me once” adage, and that’s hard to get around. I hope we do, though, because talking IS better than wasting two years.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.