Nathan Moore's Thoughts
Bush’s Press Conference
I was able to watch much of it, and came away underwhelmed (though any time the angry bat in the attic gets put in her place, I do applaud). For Bush, it was a good performance. Take away that qualifier, and this ardent neo-con is left shaking his head.
Today, Howard Kurtz has an excellent column in the Washington Post about the problems Bush faces in communicating with the country regarding Iraq and the War on Terror generally. What pains me, and Sarah somewhat touched on this a couple days ago, is that Bush has a great vision for the world, and has engineered the most pro-democracy activist foreign policy since Ronald Reagan, but he just can’t seem to tell anyone about it. In this, he is no Reagan and cannot be.
At first, I thought his less-than-polished speaking style was an asset, as it helped emphasize the contrast between him and his much slicker predecessor. Now that inability to communicate has become an albatross. We are in a war where we are winning every battle, with no draft and with an all-volunteer military, but somehow keep losing public support. We have been in Iraq for three years and have witnessed many concrete accomplishments. The same can be said for Afghanistan. But the successes are muted. The bully pulpit stutters and repeats catch-phrases, unable to convey what we have truly accomplished over the short time we have been there. We have brought drastic change to one of the most backwards regions on the planet. The failure to communicate this to the people is causing a noble longterm vision for the Middle East and the world, and the resolve to effectuate it, to fade. I have to lay a lot of that at the feet of our commander-in-chief. To me, it’s greatly disheartening. Bush is right. We are on the right side of history. Rightly in a democracy, to maintain even a moral course, the people must support you. We need the soaring rhetoric again. Mr. President, that’s your job.
March 22nd, 2006 at 12:22 pm
Bush has a great vision for the world, and has engineered the most pro-democracy activist foreign policy since Ronald Reagan, but he just can’t seem to tell anyone about it. In this, he is no Reagan and cannot be.
The reason Reagan could sell this activism is because US Troops weren’t forcing said democracy down the throat of the Russians. The Russians overthrew the USSR, not America. Perhaps we helped by spending billions of dollars on Nuclear Technology, but it wasn’t simply an American victory over totalitarianism.
Bush’s mistake was in putting American lives on the line to fight for the freedom of other people. Americans are generally isolationist, and always have been. When we are attacked we fight back, but just as you don’t want the governemnt telling you “how to spend your money”, Americans generally don’t want our gov’t telling other people how to live their lives.
The Problem with Bush isn’t simply that he can’t sell his product to the American people, its that the American people simply don’t want to buy his product. He should spend more time creating a better quality product, and less time trying to sell a turd in a box.
Tommy Boy:Hey, if you want me to take a dump in a box and mark it guaranteed, I will. I got spare time. But for right now, for your sake, for your daughter’s sake, ya might wanna think about buying a quality item from me.
March 22nd, 2006 at 3:57 pm
Gee Sean, I didn’t know you got your phd in Revisionist History. The Soviet government did not resist the people because they could not afford to do so - for a contrast, ask the Hungarians in 1956 and the Czechs in 1968. You act as if the people of Russia, Romania, Czechoslavakia, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, East Germany, Hungary, Ukraine, Latvia, etc., etc., etc. chose tyranny over freedom. What an utterly absurd and untenable a position.
I also seem to have missed the German and North Korean attacks on American soil. That’s beside the point - I’m sure the Iraqi people don’t mind their freedom being compared to a “turd in a box”. It’s as if you think the insurgents are actually representative of the populace at large. Only in the most twisted sense can maintaining the stable environment required for a functioning democracy be termed “our government telling other people how to live their lives.” Does that not sound ridiculous on its face?
Bush’s vision is sound. If you consider freedom a “turd in a box”, so be it. Let’s just be clear about it.
N
March 22nd, 2006 at 5:26 pm
Are the insurgents representative of the Iraqi people? No, but the majority of Iraqis do want us out of Iraq. As for North Korea, that was never really a popular war with the American people. As for Germany, they declared war on us, and had the capability to attack (unlike Iraq).
As for the idea that we are “maintaining the stable environment”, our presence in Iraq is the major driving force for the insurgency. There is a good chance that if we left, within a reasonable amount of time, that the insurgency would lose the approval of the 10-20% of Iraqis that support them.
Also, when I speak of pushing our viewpoints on them, I am speaking of trying to impose secular liberal democracies, not simply “democracy”. If you think our country wants democracy to flourish around the world, I think you had better climb out of the “turd box”. We DON’T want democracy when people elect leaders like Hammas, Hugo Chavez or Ahmadinejad. The vision for people in Iraq and many other Muslim countries is an Iranian style theocracy that supplants individual rights (or the rights of Israel) in favor of strict interpretation of Islamic law. Personally, when it comes to America’s best interest, I would rather have a secular military dictator over a theocratic mess any day of the week. Of course you probably can’t see where I’m coming from because you and your ilk try, day after day, to turn this country into a Christian theocracy, similar to that of Iran, by dismantling public schools and public welfare in favor of church run organizations that will spout your brand of Conservative Christianism.
March 22nd, 2006 at 7:52 pm
Nathan, I missed that phd too. I guess he got it along with the ones in abnormal psychology and psychic readings. I know Sean wouldn’t make assertions like “our presence in Iraq is the major driving force for the insurgency.” and “the majority of Iraqis do want us out of Iraq” without expertise in psychic readings or abnormal psycholgy since he has no evidence to back up these assertions. Further evidence is his knowing that you and your ilk want “to turn this country int a Christian theocracy, similiar to that of Iran, by dismantling public schools and public welfare in favor of church run organizations that will spout your brand of Conservative Chritianism.” Or did I miss that post of yours, Glen?
March 22nd, 2006 at 9:16 pm
Hey, if you don’t want to dismantle the Public School system and Public welfare, by all means correct me.
March 22nd, 2006 at 9:22 pm
George, also I don’t need a PHD in psychology to read polls…for instance this poll from USAToday
58% say the soldiers conduct themselves badly or very badly.
60% say the troops show disrespect for Iraqi people in searches of their homes, and 42% say U.S. forces have shown disrespect toward mosques.
46% say the soldiers show a lack of respect for Iraqi women.
57% say the foreign troops should leave
February 4th, 2007 at 6:50 am
news people search
SomegifttoME 497917 homepage of news people search
February 19th, 2007 at 3:31 am
game zone
Actual articles about game zone and more.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
world was 2
This site is about world was 2.
March 26th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
lotus elise
Technologies of lotus elise