The Fools' Pope

The more Bush pushes for privatization, the less the American public likes the idea. Something like 29% of Americans think it's a good idea.

So how do you explain articles like this one from Time? It portrays Bush's roadshow as a down-home, folksy good time. Never mind that the audiences are carefully screened, questions are pre-scripted, and anyone who voices dissent is immediately whisked away by the Secret Service...

Here's an example:

"[Bush] delights in defying expectations, and he can't resist tweaking the ears of all those who looked at his college transcript and voted him most likely to hawk siding. He also can't resist, because he's in the middle of prospecting for a bigger comeuppance: he'll show all those naysayer who claim his plan for Social Security is dead. " Someone said, 'It's a steep hill to climb, Mr. President,'" he told the audience at the University of Notre Dame a week ago. "Well, my attitude is, the steeper, the better—because when you get up top, you realize you have left a significant contribution behind."

Sounds pretty heroic, huh? Never mind the fact that the priviatization plan does-- by the GOPs own admission-- nothing to keep Social Security solvent. So what's up with the encomium to a man out to add trillions to the national debt and push hundreds of thousands of Americans below the poverty line?

By the way, here's one of Bush's latest statements on privatization:

"I repeat, personal accounts do not permanently fix the solution."

I'm not sure what that means, but it seems to acknowledge the shortcomings of privatization. And that's exactly why journalists shouldn't be writing puff pieces like this Time article. I don't think of it as 'folksy,' but as 'incredibly stupid.'

NOTE: I came across that last quote at flakmag. Recommended reading. Here's the link:

http://www.flakmag.com/opinion/shredder33.html