« Aragorn has "acute hydrophobia"? | Main | New Year's Predictions »

Here's how Bush apologists think

Donald E. L. Johnson of The Business Word criticizes an article in the Denver Post about the Bush medicare reforms.

He apparently believes the only proper response to Bush's $400 billion giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry in return for inadequate drug coverage and ballooning deficits is gratitude:

The Medicare Prescription Drugs, Improvement and Modernization Act of '03 (PDIMA '03) is a huge gift to today's seniors and almost seniors who have never paid for the benefit and will never pay enough premiums to cover the prescription drug benefits that many of them will receive.

But Democrats and their mouth pieces in the media, like the Denver Post's Jim Spencer are spinning PDIMA '03 as an insult to seniors rather than as the gift that it is. . .

This debate is an example of the kind of politicing that would go on if the U.S. were to adopt a single-payer system for all Americans. Articles about such a system would be silly, incomplete, pandering and outrageously dishonest, just as the the complaints about the PDIMA '03 donut hole are. Articles like this are being written by editorial writers, columnists, politicians and ungrateful seniors all over the country. . .

You've got to read the whole thing to see the disapproving tone of the column.

Egad! Imagine how ungrateful you'd have to be to write a column with a disapproving tone about Bush's policies!

Johnson's post doesn't actually defend these policies at all. Instead, it merely demonstrates that Bush apologists and right-wing bloggers all over the country are writing articles that are "silly, incomplete, pandering," and conclusory.

I won't say "dishonest," because I really do think these bloggers are more blinded than dishonest. They simply can't comprehend how anyone with any common sense could possibly disagree with the Bush agenda.

For this, they deserve pity more than criticism.

Comments

Look, you show gratitude to the Bush campaign by giving hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions. Then they show gratitude to you be giving you no-bid contracts.

What did the elderly ever do for Bush? Imagine them, raising their voices in discontent. They should be happy with the scraps we feed them. If they'd been donating to the tune that the pharmaceutical industry had, they'd have cause to complain!

While I don't approve of what certainly appears to be corporate welfare, I also find individual welfare abhorrent. Especially when you consider that as a class, those over 65 constitute the wealthiest segment of our society. Why should we be buying their drugs when most of them are squandering a lifetime's wealth on video poker and cruises to Jamaica?

Wait a second. This was a trick post, wasn't it?

You mean to say that Bush apologists think?

Yes, actually, we do. We also have enough sense of irony to laugh at such comments in the context of complaints about 'silly, incomplete, and pandering' blog posts.

I'd suggest that such blog posts are not unique to right-wing or Bush-supporting blogs. They're a matter of the medium.