Smirk said america is a child in need of a parent (so says Card)

[donsu]

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/bush/articles/2004/09/02/card_says_bush_sees_us_as_a_child_needing_a_parent/

Card says president sees America as a child needing a parent

White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card said yesterday that President Bush views America as a ''10-year-old child" in need of the sort of protection provided by a parent.

-snip-

"It struck me as I was speaking to people in Bangor, Maine, that this president sees America as we think about a 10-year-old child," Card said. ''I know as a parent I would sacrifice all for my children."

-snip-
----------------------------------


puke on Card

[gWbush is Mabus]

1. "sacrifice all" as in

cutting short the longest vacation in history to respond to a PDB that says bin laden determined to strike inside the us???


i think not

[hyphenate]

2. Actually

since Bush has the emotional age of about a 12 year old, he's not a "father" to any one, but a "big brother" and we all know what Big Brother likes to do.

[chromotone]

3. Bush: "It takes a village idiot..."

(...with apologies to Hillary Clinton!)

Here's an intriguing read:

An Interview with George Lakoff

Democrats and Republicans have different values and frame issues differently, and the difference is important.
Interview by Daniel Redwood

(snip)
Redwood: How does the conservative set of values differ from the liberal set of values?

Lakoff: It’s not simple, but here’s how it goes. We all have a metaphor that we use in everyday thought, in which the nation is a family. We speak of the Founding Fathers, for example, and of sending our sons and daughters to war. That metaphor, linking the nation to a family and understanding it that way, maps two very different conceptions of ideal family life onto political life: a Strict Father family and a Nurturant Parent family. The result is two utterly different moral systems for how the country should be run.

In a Strict Father family, there’s a background assumption that the world is a dangerous and difficult place; that there is competition; that there always will be winners and losers, and that this is a good thing; and that children are born bad and have to be made good. “Bad” meaning that they will just do what feels good rather than what’s right. The assumption is that the only way this situation can be dealt with is through a Strict Father who protects the family in the dangerous world, supports it in the difficult world, wins the competitions, and teaches his kids right from wrong.

Redwood: How does the Strict Father teach these lessons?

Lakoff: There’s only one way to do that, which is punishment when they do wrong -- painful punishment. The idea is that this will cause them to get internal discipline, so that they will discipline themselves to do right, not wrong, and that this internal discipline will serve in a secondary way to allow them to pursue their self-interest and become self-reliant. That is, to make their way in a difficult world.

What this does is to bring morality and prosperity together in the Strict Father family. It also defines two kinds of children: the good children who are the disciplined ones, who will be able to support themselves and be independent as well as moral, and the bad children who aren’t disciplined, cannot follow moral precepts, and are not disciplined enough to support themselves. The idea is that after these children have become old enough that they go out into the world, they either can take care of themselves or they are subject to the discipline of the world. That is, they get “tough love.”

(much more...)
http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=832

[Veggie Meathead]

4. Thisis word for word what Nixon said in justifying that he was above

the law during the Watergate era.