Let me count the ways that the author vents in this magnificent work some pent-up anger towards Bush. I mean Bush and Cheney. What's a Bushies? Never mind. Let's see just start the "Bush" count. . . Bush once, twice, three times, four, five, six <yawn> seven, eight, nine, zzzz, zzzz, oops! Sorry, nodded off. Where'd I leave off? Oh, yeah, ten, eleven, ah . . . I get it. There's the pattern: Bush bad, Cheney bad. We were doomed. Can't wait for the next installment that concludes: Obama good, Biden good, Pelosi brilliant! We shall survive! Viva Las Vegas!

If you're going to disagree with the author's assertion that Bush was overly authoritarian, then at least try to negate his arguments for why. Because the use of signing statements alone (far more than -any- president) marks his as the high-water mark for a power-grabbing presidency.

Yea, but how do explain fascism to a fascist?

It's an incredibly lame article that basically attempts this argument several times: 1) Bush could have been fascist, 2) But he didn't go as far as fascism, actually, 3) Which can only be because he didn't succeed at fascism! He really meant to, I'm sure! Even by the liberal groupthink standards of Slate, this is weak dishwater, even before you get to the fact that Obama is never brought up once, which means this article is built on TWO unexamined assumptions about presidential administrations. Basically, I learned more about fascism reading the bar code off Jonah Goldberg's book than this article could teach in a year.

d. travers:

If you're going to disagree with the author's assertion that Bush was overly authoritarian, then at least try to negate his arguments for why. Because the use of signing statements alone (far more than -any- president) marks his as the high-water mark for a power-grabbing presidency.

Indeed, Bush proved to run a power-grabbing presidency. In his first six months in office, he ran up the highest trillion-dollar-plus national deficit in history, and took over two of the Big Three US automakers. Next, Bush pulled out all the stops and promised to force the economy to "Go Green" with a ruinous Cap & Trade bill that threatens over half the private businesses in the US. That's followed by the Bush-Cheney Cash for Chunkers program that represents the biggest waste of taxpayer dollars I can recall.. As I write this, we're awaiting the vote next month on Bush-care: another terrible conversion from private to government- controlled healthcare.

How Bush and Cheney could unabashedly bring on such a monumental series of power-grabbng moves from on high is downright shocking and I have to agree with you that Bush . . . wait, oh, sorry, Bush isn't prez anymore, is he?

emsworth: . . . Obama is never brought up once, which means this article is built on TWO unexamined assumptions about presidential administrations. Basically, I learned more about fascism reading the bar code off Jonah Goldberg's book than this article could teach in a year.

You said it far more harshly than I would, but we're largely in agreement. I like to help round out these types of articles with comments that connect the dots of ideological nuances implied but not stated. Doing so helps fill in the blanks for readers.

I agree 100%! I was willing to overlook the continual Bush bashing, but only if he would have used the obvious example of people willing to follow Obama off the edge of a cliff. "For America to go off a cliff, the American people need to be willing to follow their leader." Instead,he chooses to bash Bush some more.