Wolcott is an editor for Vanity Fair. He is obviously in suffering from dispair.
"Bend This
Posted by James Wolcott
Discussing the British election with Wolf Blitzer, who occasionally blinked to signal he was alive despite all evidence to the contrary, CNN political analyst Carlos Watson displayed a winsome naivete about the nature of the monsters who walk the red carpets of power here and abroad, especially here.
Speculating on what the election might portend for "the special relationship" between the U.S. and Britain that we're all sick of hearing about, Watson noted that Blair did not distance himself from Bush and the Iraq war despite the unpopularity of both with the British public. Blair remained loyal and steadfast, and took his lumps (a loss of Labour seats).
To reward Blair and express his gratitude, Watson said, don't be surprised if Bush bends a little on issues significant to Blair, such as global warming and international aid.
Allow me to hazard a counter-prediction.
George Bush will do fuck-all nothing about global warming.
He may exercise his tonsils and make concerned noises, but he will dedicate himself no more vigorously to global warming than he has done for the last four pissed-away years. Like his party and the rightwing media that pimps for it (about which voice of sanity Molly Ivins has more to say), Dubya places religion over science, refuses to acknowledge that global warming even exists as a planetary peril, and has never shown the slightest interest in conservation, mass transport, or anything else that might prevent the paving over of every inch of countryside. He would plant oil rigs in Arlington Cemetery and shovel straight through the bones of dead soldiers if reserves were discovered beneath the rows of white crosses, and chainsaw the last tree in the rainforest out of pure spite. (Just this morning USA Today ran a frontpage piece about new rules that will enable more logging of national forests. I mean, could the current energy bill be more ghastly and backward-looking?)
As for international aid, Bush will probably approve greater expenditures and outreach only if there are religious riders and other strings attached. No condoms and contraception information, etc. He's a great believer in abstinence, although his daughters probably aren't, bless their little thongs.
Hasn't Watson been listening and watching? In the past few years we've heard that Bush would show some "give" on issues significant to Blair, but if he didn't do it then, why would he do it now? To display largesse? He is a stingy man for whom largesse is a sign of weakness. Bush has the privileged soul of an inveterate ingrate. He may appreciate all Blair has done, but deepdown he feels that this is only what he and the U.S. deserved.
After all, Putin supported Bush in the war on terror, and for his pains has seen Bush and the neocons do everything they can to sandbag Russia and escalate the arms race. Putin, no fool, adapted accordingly. Blair never detached from the mind-meld, his messianic gaze the mask of a tragic dupe."
jameswolcott.com |
