Again, the difference between him and Bush shows in their taste in cronies. Both are mindlessly devoted to cronyism, but Bush picks out genial, no-talent losers like himself--folks like Michael Brown and Harriet Miers and Alberto Gonzalez--and sticks them in high-profile positions of power where they're fated to humiliate themselves. Basically, he's been Dan Quayling us to death. Giuliani likes scumbags, real, one hundred-proof pieces of shit, like Bernard Kerik and Alan Placa, who've been with him forever; he wound up abandoning Kerik, but that's a testament to how thoroughly squalid everything about Kerik was; it's Giuliani's original determination to put Kerik at the head of Homeland Security that's the true indicator of his character, that and his not having any problem with carrying that particular barnacle around with him for so many years. People like Kerik are good guys in Giuliani's eyes because they have no career plan beyond following him around and keeping their mouths shut when they're not kissing his ass. People like the dismissed Chief Bratton are among the bad guys just by virtue of their having enough ability to make something of themselves outside of the great man's shadow. Maybe the best way to sum up the differences between the two is this: George Bush, Jr. may not have had the intelligence or the moral code to see that Dick Cheney had no business having an important say in how this country is run, but he still needed Dick Cheney to inform him that he was going to be his vice president. Giuliani might have actually sought him out, especially if they'd played together on the same stick ball team.
Rudy thinks Bush made mistakes executing a good plan. It is a bad plan. People will figure that out eventually, even if it is only after Rudy is elected.
So the country and the world might collapse but at least the strain of democratic populism will finally establish itself as the dominant viewpoint of the opposition.
So, we got that going for us..
No comments:
Post a Comment