Bush Derangement Syndrome

I was in Spain this past week at a sales meeting. We had folks from all over the world together for 3 days of hard work (yeah, right).

At dinner one night, I was at a table of 10, with mostly Brits and Irish (with the odd Swede joining us -- and I do mean odd. ;-)

At one point during the evening, one of my co-workers asked the money question - who would I vote for in the upcoming election? You know what they say about not discussing religion or politics in an open session like this, but hey, he started it. I answered that my candidate was not running, so I was very disappointed in the choices I faced this November. Now, of course I worded it this way on purpose, to get the next question asked -- who was my candidate?

I stated, "Well, it's against the law for him to run again, but if he could, I'd vote for George Bush in a minute".

It was as if all of the air was sucked out of the room, as 9 others took in deep breaths of astonishment. Oh boy, this was going exactly as I wanted it to! Here was the largest display of shock and awe (well, ok, not awe) that I'd seen since I stated my opinion that we should Nuke Iran.

What followed was 30 minutes of lively debate between your humble scribe and an English sales guy. Now, I respect his opinion, and wasn't trying to change it...but, really, he had so little of substance to back up his horror at my statement and his hatred for GWB that he really embarrassed himself. Not that any of the others at the table swung over to my view...it's just that he sure couldn't back up his arguments.

First he stated that it was the Bush swagger that bothered him the most. I said, "OK, so your argument is that you don't like him because of his posture?" No, no, no, said he -- it was Bush's arrogance that drove him mad. "So your main objection to Bush is his personality?" I was backing him into a corner and he just couldn't get out of it.

Next he said that he objected to America's unilateral attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq. Unilateral? In the first Gulf War, we had a coalition of over 50 countries, and UN approval to go in. In the latest Gulf War, we had a new coalition and UN approval. How unilateral is that? I stated these facts, plus said, "Hey, not that I give a crap about the UN's approval, but at least we got it. How in the hell can you say that we acted unilaterally?" No answer, of course.

I said look, why don't you just tell me why you don't like GWB...and be specific about policies or actions that he's taken that you don't like.

Of course, it was Iraq. How could I possibly support having our troops in Iraq? I reminded him that British troops were fighting alongside ours...to which he responded, "I don't support our troops being there, either".

Without going through the entire escapade, suffice it to say that I was adamant that we are fighting a war against people that would rather blow us up than live side-by-side with us. He said that if we weren't so arrogant, and tried to get along with others better, we would be more respected and accepted in the world. I laughed in his face. I pointed to one of the women at our table and said, "Hey, in their world, if she were to go outside of her house alone, without a male escort, sit next to me at this table and hold my hand like this (I held her hand in both of mine), she would be dead the next day from an honor killing. Do you understand what an honor killing is? And they'd get away with it under sharia law. Do you for one minute think it is acceptable to allow them to do that shit?

DO YOU?"



Well, I made my point, but didn't change any minds. It never ceases to amaze me what harm the left-wing media does in shaping opinion. This guy spewed all of the headlines from MSNBC and CNN, without really understanding the underlying issues, nor really being able to defend his position.

Again, I respect his sales skills and his right to his opinion. I was disappointed that he couldn't articulate them better. And I'll bet that I came across as the cowboy that night...sigh.