Letters to the Editor
-
We need a man's man
Remember, they looked in Ronald Reagan's eyes, and in two minutes, they released the hostages.
Of course, the funny part here is that George Bush was the man's man they were looking for.
I was reading an old thread on FreeRepublic an hour or so ago, about Bush's flight deck performance. It was full of:
"Bush is a great MAN and a great President."
"Bush looked great in that flight suit. The MAN makes the clothes!" (I am not adding the capitalization, by the way)
"Bush is what we need - a man's man."
At least half the comments commented on what an amazing MAN Bush was.
So what happened? Bush was the James Dean cowboy type that Camille Paglia (genius that she is) swooned over. Weren't our enemies supposed to look into his eyes and back down?
All we've heard about Bush is what a great MAN he is - so manly! And he has failed utterly.
But rather than learn from their mistakes, the Republican solution to electing a man's man that turned out to be an idiot man-child is to...wait for it...
elect another man's man.
What is the old saying about the definition of stupidity? Repeating the same actions and expecting different results?
Electing a tough guy didn't work - what we need to do is elect a tough guy! That's our new improved plan - same as the old inferior plan.

