Notes From D.R. | Random Thoughts on the Passing Scene

I can understand the mindset of the “thirty percenters”, those who still believe that George W. Bush has done an exceptional job as President despite clear evidence of his flaws. The mentality that animates Bush loyalists isn’t hard to comprehend. It’s a mentality borne of social factors both beautiful and grotesque.

“Thirty percenters”, it must be acknowledged, live in the past. Not the 1950s, as the left often claims, but in the immediate past—the six turbulent, controversial years between 1998 and 2004. “Thirty percenters” were as galvanized by these years as “progressives” were by the years 1963-1969: this era remains vivid in the collective conscience of the pro-Bush right.

The “thirty percenters” are, to quote Barack Obama, bitter—but their bitterness has a logical basis to it. They are still angry over the Monica Lewinsky case, outraged over President Clinton’s defiling of the Oval Office, horrified by his perjury, livid over the Democrat Party’s decision to defend him instead of abandoning him. These “thirty percenters” are social traditionalists who cannot fathom why some would consider Clinton’s actions morally neutral.

The pro-Bush right is still steamed over Congress’ refusal to remove Clinton from office. Clinton’s acquittal in the impeachment trial is still seen as a black mark upon the nation; for the “thirty percenters”, February 12, 1999 is a day that will live in infamy, a day that saw traditional public morality finally pass away. Angered by Clinton’s acquittal, the “thirty percenters” vowed that the next President would not be a moral reprobate.

These men and women fell in love with Bush from the beginning. They wished his father had defeated Clinton in the 1992 election, and worked tirelessly to ensure that “Dubya” would have the opportunity to bring his father’s honor and dignity back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. They loathed Al Gore, viewing him as a politician who would continue the fundamental amorality of the Clinton years. They stood by Bush while the press attacked his National Guard service and spread false rumors of past substance abuse. They stuck up for Bush when he was lambasted for supposedly lacking intelligence and gravitas.  They prayed for Bush during the post-election frenzy in Florida, and celebrated wildly when Bush was officially declared the 43^rd President.

Their hearts broke on September 11, 2001, when nineteen demented souls took the lives of nearly three thousand Americans. They donated money, gave blood, comforted survivors—and pledged allegiance to Bush when he vowed to pursue those responsible for the 9/11 attacks to the ends of the earth.

They rejoiced as our soldiers kicked butt and took names in Afghanistan, and heckled Democrats who found fault with Bush’s antiterrorism initiatives. They fully agreed with Bush when he declared that terrorism-sponsoring regimes had to be toppled—and backed the President when he said that Iraq was the most dangerous member of the Axis of Evil.

The “thirty percenters” never gave up on Iraq, never doubted for a minute that America would ultimately achieve victory. Despite the controversies surrounding the war—Abu Ghraib, the failure to find large WMD stockpiles, the “Mission Accomplished” declaration—they never wavered, never backed down, and never accepted the argument that John Kerry would do a better job as Commander-in-Chief.

The “thirty percenters” fought Kerry just as aggressively as our troops fought the enemy in Baghdad and Fallujah. Preventing Kerry from seizing the White House was Priority One: the pro-Bush right worked harder than they did four years prior, convincing the American people that while Kerry might report for duty, he wouldn’t do a damn thing once he actually had to fight. Their hard work paid off: when John Kerry conceded defeat on November 3, 2004, the “thirty percenters” danced all night. After six years, they thought, the stain of the Clinton era had finally been removed. In their view, America had once again become a patriotic nation, a decent nation, one nation truly under God.

“Progressives” assume these people are stupid. They’re not: some of the wisest folks in this country are “thirty percenters.” The problem is that their narrative ends in November 2004, and thus they can’t understand why others feel there’s more to the story.

We’re an ideologically segregated society, so those disillusioned with Bush will never understand the “thirty percenters”, and vice versa. Yet I can’t help wondering if things would be a little more civil in this country if both sides could understand each other. If the “thirty percenters” could accept that there are intelligent folks who don’t think Bush is so exceptional, and if those who disapprove of Bush could accept that there are intelligent folks who don’t think Bush is the worst President of all-time, perhaps we wouldn’t be so willing to punch each other with red and blue gloves.

We can’t all just get along—but what if we could? What if we could regard those who have differing opinions of Bush not as enemies, but as fellow Americans?