Tuesday, November 30, 2004
On this day:
One gulp, and Bush was gone
Behind the scenes at the Clinton library, we saw America's future
I miss having a president that can form a relevant complete thought and speak the English language. Now, how can someone, who is so bright and had everything going in his professional life be so misguided in his personal life? For as much as he is admired by some people, he sure wasted his last three years of his presidency to accomplsih something great. Instead there will always be an asterick in his legacy.
At the dedication of the Clinton library last week in Little Rock, Karl Rove and President Bush received separate tours of the dramatic building, a glistening silver, suspended boxcar filled with light and with a panoramic view of the Arkansas river. Flung across the river stands an old railroad bridge - and to Clinton watchers, bridges represent 'the bridge to the 21st century', the former president's re-election slogan in 1996.
The opening ceremony was biblical in its spectacle, length and rain. For more than four hours we huddled in thin ponchos under the downpour, awaiting four presidents. For the Democrats among us - former advisers and cabinet secretaries, celebrity supporters and high school friends of Bill - this was an unofficial convention, a kind of counter-inaugural, with rueful discussions of the recent defeat.
John Kerry arrived to defiant cheering from the crowd. Then, when the presidents were announced, Bush tried to push his way past Clinton at the library door to be first in line, against the already accepted protocol for the event, as though the walk to the platform was a contest for alpha male. In his speech, Clinton sought to clarify the present by his broad analysis of globalisation - 'an age of interdependence with new possibilities and new dangers' - and the offer of conciliation: 'America has two great dominant strands of political thought; we're represented up here on this stage: conservatism, which at its very best draws lines that should not be crossed; and progressivism, which at its very best breaks down barriers that are no longer needed or should never have been erected in the first place.'
In his effort to transcend the division of America into two nations, red and blue, Clinton was attempting to demonstrate his tradition - the absence of dogma, the belief that good ideas can come from anywhere, and that solutions cannot be imposed but must be worked out in democratic politics, involving the arts of building coalitions, compromises and experimentation, of which he was the leading practitioner and survivor. Read more
I miss having a president that can form a relevant complete thought and speak the English language. Now, how can someone, who is so bright and had everything going in his professional life be so misguided in his personal life? For as much as he is admired by some people, he sure wasted his last three years of his presidency to accomplsih something great. Instead there will always be an asterick in his legacy.
Comments:
<< Home
Flogger:
Thanks for the comments on my blogs. But I'm rather dismayed that after reading this post, you still believe that Bush is fit to be the Commander-in-Chief of our country. Are you indeed saying that you are more comfortable with someone at the command that rules by his "gut instinct" than someone that might be able to form his general opinion and seek other views and maybe confirmation of his original believes and perhaps see the need to change and modify his stand for the good of the country? Is this what you mean by flip flopper? If that is, I have no problem with Kerry being a flip flopper. I want a president that will be able to see things in multiple angles, to strategize from different points of views. Not from an unfounded, unsupported "gut instinct".
Make no mistake that we are still living in the effects of past administration's policies. This administration will affect this country for generations to come. Our foreign policy and diplomacy will take generations to repair. The way this (our) government pushes for agenda and policy is very short-sighted and all confined within the four-year term one serves. We need to start thinking the consequences of our actions/inactions/reactions in the longer term.
I don't believe Condi Rice was the best person for the job. I feel her academic expertise in Russian politics and history during the cold war did not serve her well in handling the Middle East conflicts. In fact, knowing her academic background, she is probably learning/researching on the job. This will be her greatest research paper in the near future. And I'm really disappointed in Colin Powell. I had all the respect for Powell at the beginning of the administration, but I'm lost at his loyalty to the administration. He should had known better than to stand at the podium at UN conference and lied about those pictures. After years in the military, FBI and CIA trenches, Powell should had the connections to get to the truth about WMD.
Unfortunately for the 48% who had a different view than you, I don't see anyone in that camp that can swing any of those red state to blue. Hillary Clinton comes with too much history and baggage.
One last ramble – nice, well design, thought-out blog you keep also.
Post a Comment
Thanks for the comments on my blogs. But I'm rather dismayed that after reading this post, you still believe that Bush is fit to be the Commander-in-Chief of our country. Are you indeed saying that you are more comfortable with someone at the command that rules by his "gut instinct" than someone that might be able to form his general opinion and seek other views and maybe confirmation of his original believes and perhaps see the need to change and modify his stand for the good of the country? Is this what you mean by flip flopper? If that is, I have no problem with Kerry being a flip flopper. I want a president that will be able to see things in multiple angles, to strategize from different points of views. Not from an unfounded, unsupported "gut instinct".
Make no mistake that we are still living in the effects of past administration's policies. This administration will affect this country for generations to come. Our foreign policy and diplomacy will take generations to repair. The way this (our) government pushes for agenda and policy is very short-sighted and all confined within the four-year term one serves. We need to start thinking the consequences of our actions/inactions/reactions in the longer term.
I don't believe Condi Rice was the best person for the job. I feel her academic expertise in Russian politics and history during the cold war did not serve her well in handling the Middle East conflicts. In fact, knowing her academic background, she is probably learning/researching on the job. This will be her greatest research paper in the near future. And I'm really disappointed in Colin Powell. I had all the respect for Powell at the beginning of the administration, but I'm lost at his loyalty to the administration. He should had known better than to stand at the podium at UN conference and lied about those pictures. After years in the military, FBI and CIA trenches, Powell should had the connections to get to the truth about WMD.
Unfortunately for the 48% who had a different view than you, I don't see anyone in that camp that can swing any of those red state to blue. Hillary Clinton comes with too much history and baggage.
One last ramble – nice, well design, thought-out blog you keep also.
<< Home
