November 14th, 2008 By SHAUN MULLEN, TMV Columnist
GEORGE WALKER BUSH: THEN AND NOW
I had long planned to post an abridged text of George Bush’s 2000 Republican National Convention acceptance speech closer to Inauguration Day and compare his words with his deeds, but the post-mortems already are flying fast and furious. This includes a lot of revisionist clap-trap from conservative bloggers whose heads remain firmly up their backsides, including drivel to the effect that because Bush “is a kind and decent man” the excesses and failures of the last eight years should be overlooked if not excused.
I happened to be in the hall when Bush accepted the nomination that steamy August night in Philadelphia and was horrified not just by the vacuity of his words but the knowledge that up on the podium was a resume without a man into which every neoconservative and other Republican with a burr in their saddle would pour their pet animosities, causes and policies.
It was going to be rocky four or eight years, but no one could have foreseen the scope and magnitude of the Bush administration’s epic failures, including its inability to confront every major crisis on its watch.
Following are excerpts from the speech in italics and what has transpired:
Thirteen English colonies on the East Coast of North America, most settled by groups seeking religious freedom, came together to form the United States. In his new alternative history, The 14th Colony, author Michael Silverstein describes a fictional additional colony, New Israelia, founded by Jews in northern Florida in the 1650s—300 years before the actual founding of the State of Israel in 1948.
“Before beginning serious research for this project,” said Silverstein, “I viewed a book about such a colony as a tongue-in-cheek way to explore one of history’s most vibrant and quirky eras, the mid-17th century. The more I researched, however, the more obvious it became to me that this wasn’t just an alternative history with a far-fetched premise, but something that could easily have happened.
“In a number of ways,” Silverstein continued, “this period also bore some chilling resemblances to our own times. There were international conflicts over markets and resources. There were heinous deeds committed by religious fanatics. Millions of people in different parts of the world were being brutally exploited and enslaved. False messiahs were garnering huge followings. There were even examples of irrational exuberance—the entire economy of Holland was almost taken down by a tulip buying bubble.”
The story of The 14th Colony plays out in both the New and Old Worlds—in an England governed as a republic under Oliver Cromwell; in the Spanish-controlled Americas; in the ghettos of Southern Italy and the surprisingly tolerant Lithuanian-Polish Commonwealth in Eastern Europe; and in the Holland of Rembrandt, and its Jewish-friendly colony in northeastern Brazil.
A fuller description of The 14th Colony, and the era in which the book is set, along with notes about its author and book ordering information, can be found on the book’s Web site.
Is there anyone left out there wondering of the the rest of this planet sees America in a new light after President-elect Obama’s victory?
This article by the great Christian Merville of Lebanon’s L’Orient Le Jouris particularly eloquent - and ends much more cold-eyed than this paragraph in the beginning might lead one to believe. And demonstrating the incredible change in perceptions, it has the same refrain as the famed Le Monde front page of September 12, 2001:
“A leader was born, an unknown even four years ago, who through the magic of his word has enabled all of us, beyond the borders of his country, to imagine that we are all Americans, in solidarity at last after having been divided for so long … But the words, as exhilarating as they may be, will not suffice. Nor will promises of a better tomorrow if they take too long to come. The disappointment could be as cruel as the great hopes that were raised when everything seemed possible.”
The tidal wave of global reaction to the election of President-elect Barack Obama is enough to make a foreign desk editor cry over what to do next. Coming later today will be articles from Russia and Iraq. Here are just a few of the many stories posted on WORLDMEETS.US in the past 24 hours:
“The arrival today of the first man of color to the apex of power in the only global superpower testifies to the logic of this country and its evolution. Once again, America was ready. … Freedom is that which has allowed both slavery and its eradication; the assertion of civil rights and the existence of the Ku Klux Klan; the many ’success stories’ of ’self-made men,’ and the absence of the social state. Whoever is in power in America, this will remain at the heart of the country’s psyche.”
“Economically, culturally and militarily, the notion that the strongest must stand alone has been shown to be absurd. Cooperation rather than confrontation and negotiation rather than dictation are the new and astounding ideas embodied by Obama. … Obama in no magician - and McCain would have been less so - but he has one great advantage: He can, since he isn’t committed to a rigid doctrine and doesn’t believe himself to be on a divine mission (like Bush has), act according to rational and pragmatic reasoning. He can finally reestablish a government based on reality - no matter how bleak that may be once initiated.”
“”Let us not be stingy with our pleasure; good news is pretty rare these days. And when we use the word “us,” we mean the near-totality of the rest of the world, who were worried that we would not be seconded in our passion for Barack Obama by the American voters on Election Day.”
“Obama is the President of the United States that the planet requires. Yet paradoxically, this doesn’t necessarily imply that an Obama presidency is the best thing for United States society. … one must wonder whether the society of that country, and above all, the United States Congress, will agree. Why? Because what Obama wants to do is make the United States somewhat similar to a European welfare state, and it’s likely, sooner or later, that United Statesiens [people of the United States] will turn their back on such a project. In fact, even though the country is one of the most advanced, it has the greatest inequality in terms of wealth distribution and has never had a viable and durable social-democratic party.”
Is Barack Obama the antidote to eight years of George W. Bush? Anyone reading this editorial from Iran’s state-controlled Tehran Times would certainly get that impression. Unquestionably, Tehran is even more pleased than most Obama fans about the President-elect’s success. The editorial asks and answers: ‘And why was Obama the world’s candidate? Quite simply, because they feel they can talk to him.’ The winds of dialogue are surely blowing. Now to see what comes of it …
November 4th, 2008 By MICHAEL STICKINGS, Assistant Editor
Peter Beinart wrote this in yesterday’s Washington Post:
Why has America turned on Sarah Palin? Obviously, her wobbly television interviews haven’t helped. Nor have the drip, drip of scandals from Alaska, which have tarnished her reformist image. But Palin’s problems run deeper, and they say something fundamental about the political age being born. Palin’s brand is culture war, and in America today culture war no longer sells. The struggle that began in the 1960s — which put questions of racial, sexual and religious identity at the forefront of American politics — may be ending. Palin is the end of the line.
I got caught up in the culture war(s) when I was at Tufts in the early-’90s. The economy wasn’t going all that well, but, overall, it was a time of prosperity and, with the Cold War just ended, hope. The problem is, with prosperity comes the sort of security, which in itself isn’t a bad thing, that gives people the time to focus on other things, like, say, “moral values” and “culture.” In other words, when you aren’t focusing on your immediate security, economic or otherwise, you tend to turn your attention to other battles.
Beinart is right, to a point, that “Palin’s attacks are also failing because of generational change. The long-running, internecine baby boomer cultural feud just isn’t that relevant to Americans who came of age after the civil rights, gay rights and feminist revolutions.”
The thing is, I have no confidence that Palin “may be the last culture warrior on a national ticket for a very long time,” or that a new, post-culture war “political age” is being born. While it is true that economic insecurity and, lest we forget, national security insecurity are the dominant issues of the day, “culture” is a weapon Republicans are not about to lay down.
