<more after the fold...>There's been a lot of talk about framing recently. I can see exactly why the administration wants to frame Bush's vacations as trips to the "Western White House". He's currently on the longest Presidential vacation in at least 35 years. This month he'll surpass Reagan's astonishing two-term total of 335 days at the ranch, and Bush has only been in office for four and a half years. The Bush staff and handlers clearly think he's isolating himself and spending too much time away from the office -- why else would they be pushing for the reframing? "Leisure retreat" is more accurate and has a better ring to it.
What really irks me about the President's language is that the real White House is owned and paid for by the taxpayers of this great country. It's a symbol of a government by the people and for the people. Bush's estate is private property that's a symbol of isolation and privilege. Don't let him hijack our national heritage -- refer to his Crawford vacation home as his leisure retreat.
The word "leisure" implies carefree relaxation, even laziness. Bush is a man of leisure whose future was bought and paid for by his family's money. He's a member of the leisure class -- the ultra-rich elite who have no idea what a working class life is like. "Retreat" is just as appropriate. He's running away from responsibility, shirking his duties and afraid of the consequences of his actions. Why does our war President spend so much time retreating?
Anyone can play the reframing game. Let's never invoke the administration's positive frame by referring to the Crawford ranch as the "Western White House". Instead say, "Bush is off vacationing again at his leisure retreat in Texas".