To go to ground or stand one's ground

George Bush Jr. is rather accomplished at going to ground in order to put his detractors off the scent. His affected simplicity and earnest stylings make him a cool contender for the hearts and minds of middle America. The power of the Chimera is its ability to remain fluidly ambiguous but perhaps the hubris that comes from a second term in office has emboldened his camp to the point of making an actual stand. By fixing a position and marking lines in the political sands their underlying ideology is crystalizing out--making for a better-resolved target.
The recent FCC rulings belie an underlying desire for having their cake and eating it too--the ambiguity of platform and purpose versus explicitly stated ideals. That the Bush camp panders to an intoxicating Rockwellesque nostalgia for a ruggedly individual and Christian America infused with notions of personal security, family and community values runs at odds with the brokenness of contemporary America. To be sure the surface content of the recent rulings speak to this;however, I cannot help but see it as another tainted red herring aimed at diverting our gaze from the move toward a greater consolidation and concentration of power.
More important than regulating offensive content is the move toward deregulating the checks and balances on media ownership. This has been entirely overlooked in the furor over content censorship. This concentration would facilitate a fait accompli in the move toward one voice unchallenged by competition or dissent. This would allow for a full-blown digitization of American cultural values by the few over the many and would pave the way for sweeping ommissions of offensive/dissenting content and usher in the "Newspeak" of Orwell's 1984.
Bush's gloating sarcasm reveals a deep and scornful derision for the public voice that he shares like a privelaged joke with his cadre of insiders. Hitler, too, spoke in this same trifling manner when deflecting criticism of his policies of Jewish disenfranchisement and annihilation. He would often offer glib rebuttals rife with euphamisms and smug double entendres that served to throw the scent off the darker and more menacing aspects of his full agenda--all the while relishing the unspoken implications of his actions and sharing them with those in the know.