Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (14686)	3/15/2003 8:30:13 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

My American experience By Tom Regan \| csmonitor.com csmonitor.com "Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country." - Theodore Roosevelt.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (14686)	3/16/2003 2:33:40 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Repairing the World By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN Columnist The New York Times March 16, 2003 Some days, you pick up the newspaper and you don't know whether to laugh or cry. Let's see, the prime minister of Serbia just got shot, and if that doesn't seem like a bad omen then you missed the class on World War I. Our strongest ally for war in Iraq is Bulgaria — a country I've always had a soft spot for, because it protected its Jews during World War II, but a country that's been on the losing side of every war in the last 100 years. Congress is renaming French fries "freedom fries." George Bush has managed to lose a global popularity contest to Saddam Hussein, and he's looking to build diplomatic support in Europe by flying to the Azores, a remote archipelago in the Atlantic, to persuade the persuaded leaders of Britain and Spain to stand firm with him. I guess the North Pole wasn't available. I've been to the Azores. It was with Secretary of State James Baker on, as I recall, one of his seven trips around the world to build support for Gulf War I. Mr. Baker used the Azores to refuel. Having said all that, I am glad Mr. Bush is meeting with Tony Blair. In fact, I wish he would turn over leadership on the whole Iraq crisis to him. Mr. Blair has an international vision that Mr. Bush sorely needs. "President Bush should be in charge of marshaling the power for this war," says the Middle East expert Stephen P. Cohen, "and Tony Blair should be in charge of the vision for which that power should be applied." Why? What does Tony Blair get that George Bush doesn't? The only way I can explain it is by a concept from the Kabbalah called "tikkun olam." It means, "to repair the world." If you listened to Tony Blair's speeches in recent weeks they contain something so strikingly absent from Mr. Bush's. Tony Blair constantly puts the struggle for a better Iraq within a broader context of moral concerns. Tony Blair always leaves you with the impression that for him the Iraq war is just one hammer and one nail in an effort to do tikkun olam, to repair the world. Did you see Mr. Blair's recent speech about the environment? He called for a new "international consensus to protect our environment and combat the devastating impacts of climate change." "Kyoto is not radical enough," he said. "Ultimately this is about our world as a global community. . . . What we lack at present is a common agenda that is broad and just. . . . That is the real task of statesmanship today." Did you hear Mr. Blair talk Friday about the Middle East conflict? "We are right to focus on Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction," he said, "but we must put equal focus on the plight of the people whose lives are being devastated by lack of progress in the peace process. Israeli civilians and Palestinians." Contrast that with Mr. Bush. His White House declaration about resuming the peace process was delivered with all the enthusiasm of someone about to have his teeth drilled. On the environment, the president has never appreciated how damaging it was for him to scrap the Kyoto treaty, which was unimplementable, without offering an alternative. Nothing has hurt America's image more than the impression Mr. Bush has left that when it comes to terrorism — our war — there must be a universal crusade, but on the environment — the universal concern of others — we'll do whatever we want. Yes, some people and nations are just jealous of America's power and that's why they oppose us on Iraq. But there is something more to the opposition. I deeply identify with the president's vision of ending Saddam Hussein's tyranny and building a more decent, progressive Iraq. If done right, it could be so important to the future of the Arab-Muslim world, which is why I won't give up on this war. But can this Bush team be counted on to do it right? Mr. Bush's greatest weakness is that too many people, at home and abroad, smell that he's not really interested in repairing the world. Everything is about the war on terrorism. Lord knows, I don't diminish the threats we face, but for 18 months all we've been doing is exporting our fears to the world. Virtually all of Mr. Bush's speeches are about how we're going to protect ourselves and whom we're going to hit next. America as a beacon of optimism — America as the world's chief carpenter, not just cop — is gone. We need a little less John Wayne and a little more J.F.K. Once we get this Iraq crisis behind us, we need to get back to exporting our hopes, not just our fears. nytimes.com

To: TigerPaw who wrote (14686)	3/16/2003 5:29:40 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Pliable Bush Puppet of Hawks by Linda McQuaig Published on Sunday, March 16, 2003 by the Toronto Star In an apparent attempt to come up with a guise other than warmonger, George W. Bush is being hastily repackaged as "deeply religious." Bush has always been officially described as "born again" — a useful device to explain the transformation from his early days (up to the age of 40) of heavy drinking and carousing. But the notion that Bush is motivated by deep religious convictions is being pushed with such vigour these days by his supporters that one senses an orchestrated campaign — perhaps to prevent worldwide skepticism about the motives for the Iraq invasion from spreading to the U.S. Some Americans may worry about an evangelical crusader controlling the world's biggest nuclear arsenal, but religion — even the fundamentalist variety — is generally considered a good thing in the U.S. Certainly, focusing on religion helps keep attention away from other more contentious motives for invading Iraq, such as oil or world domination. So the media have been hyping Bush's alleged spirituality (including a Newsweek cover story on "Bush and God"), even as the president snubbed pleas for peace from world religious leaders and last week tested a 21,000-pound bomb in preparation for unloading it on people in Iraq. (Blessed are the bombed children.) Of course, it's possible that Bush is deeply religious, whatever than means. More likely, Bush is simply an empty vessel, a hollow shell, a person of weak character and limited life experience who is therefore highly susceptible to the control of a small, determined group of ideological hard-liners bent on asserting U.S. power more forcefully in the world. A description attributed to Bush himself in 1989 seems apt. The Houston Chronicle reported Bush telling a friend: "You know, I could run for governor, but I'm basically a media creation. I've never done anything. I've worked for my dad. I worked in the oil business ..." One thing that stands out in Bush's past, besides the partying and business failures, is the extent to which he relied on his family's political and financial connections. U.S. presidents have often come from blue blood backgrounds, but George W. Bush makes even John F. Kennedy look like a self-made man. But back to that group of hard-liners, (which includes prominent Bush advisers like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, John Bolton and Douglas Feith). The hard-liners have long been a force within the Republican party, struggling against the post-Vietnam resistance in America to getting entangled in a big war. Their approach could be described as U.S. supremacist; they are dismissive of international organizations like the U.N. and multilateral attempts at disarmament. They want Washington to use its military superiority to enforce American global dominance — a goal that has become more achievable since the demise of Soviet power. The hard-liners became a significant force in the administration of George Bush Sr., under the tutelage of hard-liner Dick Cheney, who served at the time as defense secretary. But their push to make Washington more assertive and unilateral was held in check somewhat back then, since Bush the elder was a multilateralist, as were others in his cabinet. He was also — whatever else one says about him — experienced, accomplished, knowledgeable about the world and in control of his own government. None of this could be said of his son, whose presidency came, in the end, courtesy of the ultimate in connections — Supreme Court judges appointed by his father. George W. wasn't part of the hard-line Cheney crowd; while they were honing their arguments about U.S. supremacy, he was focused on his next martini and on making a fortune in the oil industry using his father's connections. But he was happy to get on board with them for his presidential bid, selecting Cheney as his running mate. To the public, Bush appeared affable and not particularly threatening, even talking in a televised presidential debate about the need for America to be "humble" internationally. But, lacking any outside constituency or the experience to control the politically savvy hard-liners, George W. became their boy in a way his father never was. The American people, however, remained resistant to war. Then came Sept. 11. The hard-liners knew their ship had come in. And George W. finally found something he was apparently good at — talking about evil and vengeance. It is a tragedy for the world that such a pliable, empty vessel as George W. Bush should happen to be in power at a time when the traumatization and lulling of the American public has made possible the carnage about to unfold in Iraq. _______________________________________________________ Linda McQuaig is a Toronto-based author and political commentator. Her column appears every Sunday. Copyright 1996-2003. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited commondreams.org