President George III is visiting England this week where he will likely be greeted with open arms. The centerpiece of his reception is a planned demonstration by upwards of 100,000 on November 19, organized by the Stop the War Coalition. They intend to march through the British capital to Trafalgar Square where they hope to pull down a giant statue of Bush; welcome triumphant liberator, don’t slip on the rose petals.
How close the protesters actually get to President Bubble Boy remains to be seen, but David Blaine discovered that living in an acrylic box suspended from a crane above London isn’t enough to shield an illusionist from public ridicule.
Bush’s handlers have demanded a rolling “exclusion zone” around the president during his visit as well as a ban on marches in parts of central London, a ban which British anti-war protesters vow to defy. American officials have also dictated that a “distance” be kept between Bush and protesters — strictly for security reasons, of course. The more cynical might also suspect the separation is designed to prevent dissenters from appearing in any television footage with Bush. After all, you can’t have them blocking any spontaneous “Mission Accomplished” banners that might pop up unexpectedly.
It stands to reason that if people get too close to presidential promenades, before you know it somebody’s going to claim that the president’s not wearing any clothes. And if the president’s got no clothes, people might also see that he has a bald-headed Dick that does his thinking for him (though Cheney will not be making the trip to England).
Noted American historian Henry Steele Commager once said, “Men in authority will always think that criticism of their policies is dangerous. They will always equate their policies with patriotism, and find criticism subversive.”
As George W. Bush, meanwhile, said last month, “These are open forums, you’re able to come and listen to what I have to say.”
Leaders who govern sometimes say, “You may have a point there.” Leaders who seek to rule, like a previous George III, do not.
This article appears in Nov 19-25, 2003.
