SERVE AT "BUSH'S PLEASURE?" ICK...

During the aftermath of all of the various screw ups of the Bush Administration we've heard the common excuse about whether members of said admin are going to resign. A good number of Bush's pals have been asked this with many of them dodging the question by simply saying "I serve at the president's pleasure."

For instance, check out [http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BUSH_SHAKEUP?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-03-28-08-42-25|this March 28, 2006 article] at AP.Org that reports on Andy Card's abrupt resignation and Joshua Bolten, his replacement:

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Bolten will have the authority to make personnel shifts if he deems them necessary, and he declined to say whether top aides, such as the two current deputy chiefs of staff, Joe Hagin and Karl Rove, would remain in place.

"All of us serve at the pleasure of the president," McClellan said. "It's premature to talk about any future decisions that may or may not be made."

This may seem like a minor criticism, but that phrase is now starting to bother me as much as the use of the word "homeland" to describe America. It's obvious why "homeland" is a bad idea--because it's so similar to "fatherland." How many times have people like me been criticized for comparing Bush and Co. to the Nazis? Well, Bush started it.

Anyway, so any time someone refers to "serving at the president's pleasure" I get unnerved. This makes it sound like the people saying it are willing subjects of the crown. Except, this is America, we don't have a "crown" in any real sense. Still, this sort of phrasing, I am concerned, will encourage the mindset in Americans that the government and Bush are royalty.

It's bad enough we STILL can't know for sure if Bush really won the presidency in 2000 or 2004 (with no real investigations of either), it's bad enough Bush did, in fact, follow many Nazi battle tactics and strategies in the Iraq war (no, serious, he did--go find a copy of the book Shock and Awe. It's all about Nazi war tactics). It's also bad enough that he almost always speaks only to his supporters and hardly ever allows his detractors in the room with him. He also has been accused of breaking a great many laws (and, in fact, has broken them) but has yet to answer to those accusations in any real way.

Now with phrases that refer to Bush's "pleasure" instead of his "discretion" or "judgement" it just might create the idea in the minds of the American public that the guy in the White House can make things happen based on his whim--by the wave of his hand or by the pointing of his thumb up or down. You know, like a Roman emperor.

Most Americans already think that Bush has the best interests of Americans at heart (they just disapprove of the way he's handled things) but fail to see that impeachment really is necessary. He's used nationalism, patriotism, the threat of new terrorist attacks and the memory of 911 to manipulate the American people into supporting him when there is no substantial threat from terrorists or anyone else.

Sure sounds like a king to me.