TW: Not surprisingly the blogosphere has had a field day with the Bush shoe throwing episode. My personal view is as follows. Bush actually displayed considerable grace while ducking the shoes yet staying composed and unperturbed. Few are more disdainful of Bush and his administration but I draw the line at physical assaults on he or any POTUS. This was most definitely a physical assault and one that almost created injury. Imagine if Bush had been less quick with the duck. While not likely to have caused serious injury, a POTUS with a bloodied lip or black eye is not acceptable. Imagine if the target had been Obama? I am surprised at the level of snark associated with the event.
To me I merely remain surprised at how long a man was able to stand feet from a POTUS directing venom without a secret service bullet implemented in his forehead.
2 comments:
I think that it was a very telling act and reflective of how George Bush squandered the good will of the world after 9/11--and um, y'know that whole "war thing".
Bush was never the "uniter not a divider" that he portended.
At this point (I know, very very too soon to tell...but still) I doubt that Obama is in line for a shoe hurling. If his appointments thus far are any indication Obama is walking the walk that Bush never did.
Yes, that reporter threw a shoe---but it was more about the cultural declaration behind the act. More so than the act itself.
While I agree with the substance of what you are saying, the form of the protest does not work for me. Again what if he had been actually been hit?
Re Obama while neither you nor I would likely want to throw a shoe at Obama, I am sure others will inevitably for whatever reason.
Finally when a POTUS takes a shoe as far as I am concerned the US is the target not W. Bush personally. You respect the office/rank not the person.
Post a Comment