Sharon Kim skim@media.ucla.edu
Click Here for more articles by Sharon Kim Â
Public opinion in the United States seems to shift more often
than California’s tectonic plates.
For many Americans ““ that is, the non-diehard-Republicans
““ reactions to the presidency of George W. Bush have closely
resembled the five stages of grief.
First, there was denial: “No, Bush didn’t win the
election. He can’t even pronounce “˜subliminal.’
Maybe Gore can still win. Recount the votes! Recount the
votes!”
Then, there was resentment: “Why Bush? Why did he have to
become elected? Screw the Electoral College! I’m moving to
Canada!”
After this came the bargaining period: “Well, I’m
still pissed about his election, but Bush is going to give us tax
cuts, isn’t he? Maybe I should rethink the Toronto
thing.”
But then came Sept. 11, and virtually all Americans reached
acceptance. “Bush rocks! U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!”
Unfortunately, the masses are fickle, and when the White House
confirmed it had received warnings in the weeks before Sept. 11 of
possible terrorist attacks using airplanes, there was a shift again
““ this time into the blame game.
Of course, the Democrats are having a field day with this.
It’s all Bush’s fault, they say. He should have beefed
up airport security. He should have been more aware of what was
going on. To the schools of Democrats smelling blood, Bush slammed
them down, criticizing that “second-guessing has become
second nature.”
In the meantime, bandwagons of opinions are being shifted by the
skim of what people find in media coverage regarding Bush ignoring
early warnings. People should not, however, be so easily convinced
that Bush is a bumbling fool who couldn’t recognize danger if
it hit him over the head.
It is not feasible for the White House to consider and react to
every terrorist warning it receives, and according to Bush, the
information was so vague that there could not have been much action
taken even if they wanted to. Also, if the White House had released
information that they’d received warnings of possible
attacks, there would have been mass hysteria.
But on the other hand, the White House knows how to sway public
opinion just as well. Cheney has been speaking of terrorist attacks
in the near future, and the FBI is warning of possible threats
to New York landmarks like the Statue of Liberty and the Brooklyn
Bridge. In order to counter the loss of credibility the
administration has recently suffered, Bush’s team is doing
what it can to save itself by averting public opinion into a
different stage: mass fear.
People need a firm perspective against the changing tides of
national opinion. Media news coverage of politicians pointing
fingers will always sound dramatic, but how much of the world is
really set in one extreme vein or another?
Americans should realize from recent events that our government
was not as alert to terrorism as it should have been, and this
awareness will make the nation more vigilant in the future. But
people should also know that most of the talk on the cable news
channels must be taken in stride.
And what of the supposed imminent attacks? Bush officials just
want to prove to the public they are important and
knowledgeable, and that you shouldn’t criticize your
government or you’re unpatriotic, damnit.
Either way, don’t be so easily fooled.