Like two prizefighters hugging opposite ropes in the early rounds, Presidential candidates George W. Bush and Adam Felber circled each other warily in New York City yesterday, each seeking an opening in the other’s seemingly impenetrable defenses…
Bush was having dinner at the midtown Sheraton Hotel, capping off a day wherein he pulled in about $4 million. Me, I was at a nearby restaurant, dining with a small group of supporters (technically, the other two members of my sketch comedy trio). My fundraising efforts produced a reasonably-priced chicken parmigiana and a basket of bread. Advantage: Bush, by four million dollars and a few appetizers.
Later, I took to the streets, garnering supportive smiles from everyone I came into contact with. Feeling a bit more assured, I ambled towards where the incumbent President was dining. I wanted to check out the new releases at the Virgin Megastore anyway. The Sheraton was ringed by hundreds upon hundreds of angry protesters, making speeches, bearing signs, calling for impeachment. I strolled by unmolested. Advantage: Felber, by hundreds and hundreds of protestors.
We’ll call the first Battle of New York a draw, then.
______________________________________________________________
Truth to tell, I shouldn’t have been as surprised as I was by the size and vehemence of the protesting crowd. Whatever their various pet issues were, there’s a lot of general anger here in New York City when it comes to the federal and state governments. Out-of-towners might not have heard too much about this.
Well, you might have heard of certain terrorist attacks on our fair city. That made the news, if I’m not mistaken. In fact, it was a big part of the rationale behind the United States’ various military adventures. Millions of dollars and thousands of lives have been spent on wreaking revenge in our ongoing wars with the Ayatollah Saddam bin Laden of Iraqaedistan, after all.
What you may not be hearing about is the toll it’s taken on New York. National news tends to focus on the weird things that our tone-deaf mayor is doing to raise a few bucks, not the reasons behind it. I’ll make it simple:
Having the two largest buildings in your city and thousands of your citizens destroyed while remaining the world’s most desirable target for terrorist attacks isn’t as fun as it sounds. There’s still a gaping hole in the ground, displaced or eradicated businesses, and grieving families galore. There’s a hefty new monthly bill involved in staying at a constant “Orange Alert” while the rest of the nation spends most of its time standing down at “Yellow.” It all costs a lot of money, especially if you’re also trying to deal with a nationwide economic downturn.
The Bush government’s solution can be summed up in two words - “tough love.” Let us know they love us, and then go off and fight wars (that most of us disapproved of) in our name. Meanwhile, Bush won’t mollycoddle us by extending too much aid to guard our ports, bridges, or infrastructure. If we New Yorkers start expecting that kind of treatment, after all, we might start thinking that it’s the federal government’s job to ensure the physical security of our cities and citizenry.
The State of New York has been just as sympathetic. Just last month a commuter tax, which would’ve made the city’s work force at least partly responsible for helping maintain the roads and resources that they use daily, was struck down. “Things are tough all over,” was the message, “and now go fix that water main break, because the executive washroom on the 59th floor isn’t getting enough pressure in the shower. Thanks.”
It would be nice if Bush was taking as much care in rebuilding New York as he’s devoting to rebuilding Iraq. Then again, he’s not going to be picking up any electoral votes from either, and there’s no oil here. But when he uses 9/11 as both a rationale for war and part of his “trifecta” excuse for the flaccid economy, you’d think he’d spare a little more sympathy for the actual place where most of the attacks’ damage was done.
Nah. As I said, there are no votes here. Just a nice backdrop, which is why the Republican National Convention will coronate him here next year.
Note to conventioneers: Bring plenty of bottled water, all-terrain vehicles, and portable electric generators. You may need ‘em. This ain’t exactly Baghdad, you know.





13 comments
Georgette
June 24, 2003 at 5:57 pm
1If all the pious speeches at the Convention were taxed ten cents a patriotic hyperbole, and all that money were to go to New York City, the city would be out of debt until the next turn of the century.
Instead, the conventioneers will speak about their love of the City, invest in Broadway shows, hotdog vendors and hookers, and then go, feeling noble and daring.
New York, New York, it’s a hell of a stage set!
stolenelectioncoin.com
June 24, 2003 at 9:00 pm
2Bush provoked 9-11.
Republicans better than Democrats on National Security?
That myth exploded with the first plane that hit the first World Trade Tower on Sept. 11.
I need you and 5 of your friends to read and sign this important petition.
Tell the Republican Congress that you don’t support the mean spirited radical Republican agenda.
Sign the petition at
http://www.thePetitionSite.com/takeaction/365235275
Tell CVS Pharmacies to tell HMOs in NY that they must even out their premiums or CVS will lose our business in NY
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/833049584
The George W Bush 2000 Stolen Election Commemorative Coin
http://www.stolenelectioncoin.com
All profits go to charity.
If you run a website with progressive links please post these links. Thank you.
Melanie
June 24, 2003 at 10:16 pm
3No one remembers this, but George was full of tough love for California too. Governor Davis went to Cheney and to the Federal Energy Regulatory Comm. saying that there were illegal market manipulations happening with the energy traders and that California needed help to contol them. He got back, “California needs to look to their own faulty deregulation laws” (enacted by a republican gov, I might add, if I was bitter…) is what we got from the federal (un) elected officials. They were too busy at the time …nurturing Enron.
And now, the republican goons are foisting a recall Davis campaign on us. Because, darn it, when they lose an election it is obviously not set up well enough.
LAW
June 25, 2003 at 12:34 am
4Out of curiosity, how much of that $20 Billion did we ever get?
Jon Delfin
June 25, 2003 at 9:44 am
5Yeah, yeah, politics, fund raising, protests, yeah, yeah. What I really want to know is, where did you find a reasonably priced chicken parmigiana?
Anonymous
June 25, 2003 at 11:19 am
6Melanie: You must admit that while Davis didn’t cause the problems, he reacted to them in a singularly inept fashion. And the election certainly was not set up so well, or we wouldn’t have had a 10% or so third-party vote. And recalling Davis might actually work for the Democrats, because there are at least three Repubs likely to run and most of the top Democrats have already refused to dive in. If one Democrat runs against three Republicans, well, do the math.
Susie
June 25, 2003 at 11:59 am
7This I can get behind! Should be required reading for all.
I actually like Bloomberg, and don’t envy the time and Pataki pickle he’s found himself in.
Youse got my vote!
adam
June 25, 2003 at 12:18 pm
8Jon -
It was over at “Route 66″ on 9th Avenue and, um, 55th, I think.
Not a particularly good chicken parmigiana, mind you. We candidates have to get used to diner fare.
Linkmeister
June 25, 2003 at 4:49 pm
9Well, Adam, this proves you’re on the same rubber-chicken circuit that the President is. Did any of those protesters have any rubber chickens to throw?
Wayne Altman
June 26, 2003 at 2:16 am
10I will say I find it amusing that the highest concentration of anti-war protesters came from New York City, the target of the terroists attacks.
Someday (probably after NY is leveled by these assholes you might understand they mean business, and so should we. As GWB would say ” Ain’t a better defense than a good offense”
On your knees… either to thank our current President for being the awesome leader he is, or you will be on your knees when these butt fucks attack again. Me? I prefer the former. Bush in 2006 !!!!
Landis
June 26, 2003 at 7:19 pm
11Bush in 2006? Did I miss something? Don’t we still have 4-year terms? He was elected (or “elected” depending on how you think of it) in 2000, yes? Took office in Jan 2001? That would mean the next election is 2004 and the next president (even if it’s GWB) would be sworn in Jan 2005.
So what’s this 2006 thing? Or are you saying that the whole election thing will be officially changed because of our current perma-war? I’m not postive I’d put it past our current government. “National Security” and all…
Too much for my little brain….
Elliott
June 27, 2003 at 12:22 am
12Landis, didn’t you read the fine print of the pat-riot act. Bush gets to stay in office until we land a man (or woman) on Mars. Wayne is just being pessimistic. Hopefully we will never get to Mars and we will have Bush in office until he passes away. Everything will be solved by then. I bet we might even find WMD’s before he kicks tha bucket..??!!##(&*^^$%
John Isbell
July 4, 2003 at 7:31 pm
13“Millions of dollars.”
Billions. You’re off by three orders of magnitude, Adam. Actually, four - tens of billions.
That 2006 thing is weird. Does Joe GOP not actually know when the next Presidential Election is held? They are a strange species. But hey, maybe he’s an expert on, um, tiddlywinks. I’d prefer him to be voting on that.