Goodbye Donald
A post to commemorate the belated passing of Donald Rumsfeld. Bush showed himself to be a man with immense balls by keeping him for such a long time when it was plain for all to see that his post-conflict strategy in Iraq was, for want of a better word, rubbish. It's not surprising that Bush was so stubborn about Rumsfeld though - supposedly one of the reasons that he has been so popular (at times) is his confidence in his own decisions. However this was a time when that confidence clearly betrayed him.
I guess now's the time when we find out what plans, if any, the Democrats have had up their sleeves these past twelve years. Maybe we'll see something getting done about climate change?
With regard to a post of a couple months ago - "Rampant Cross-dressing" - note this observation: "The Times believes the Democrats won votes by moving into the centre ground. Among these so-called "Blue Dog" Democrats is Jon Tester, the Montana Senate candidate, who is "is an anti-abortion, pro-gun, three-generation farmer with a buzz cut, three missing fingers on his left hand and no big fan of Hillary Clinton"." It could be a sign of the political discourse having been hegemonised by the right, to the extent that the only way to get elected is to talk like you're one of them (in much the same way as David Cameron is trying to change the image of the Conservative party over here). But I guess this was a local phenomenon in Montana, rather than a national one.
I guess now's the time when we find out what plans, if any, the Democrats have had up their sleeves these past twelve years. Maybe we'll see something getting done about climate change?
With regard to a post of a couple months ago - "Rampant Cross-dressing" - note this observation: "The Times believes the Democrats won votes by moving into the centre ground. Among these so-called "Blue Dog" Democrats is Jon Tester, the Montana Senate candidate, who is "is an anti-abortion, pro-gun, three-generation farmer with a buzz cut, three missing fingers on his left hand and no big fan of Hillary Clinton"." It could be a sign of the political discourse having been hegemonised by the right, to the extent that the only way to get elected is to talk like you're one of them (in much the same way as David Cameron is trying to change the image of the Conservative party over here). But I guess this was a local phenomenon in Montana, rather than a national one.
posted by Peter at 10:26
7 Comments:
Oddly the election leaves me unmoved. Rummy finally went because facts showed him what reason could not. But are the democrats really better placed to fix what has been shattered? I want to believe so but remain sceptical. Realistically, the best we can hope for are two relatively calm years. If we are lucky there might be dialogue with Iran, engagement in Israel and Palestine, and a stabilisation in Iraq...if we are very lucky. Sometimes I wish I could pray.
Yeah, from what I've heard and read the Democrats are far from convincing on policy.
As nearly always happens for the last two years of an eight-year presidency, particularly when facing an opposition Congress, y'all should expect to see President Bush spending a lot more time on the road. He'll likely turn nearly all of his attention to foreign affairs. I would expect to see renewed efforts in Israel, eastern Europe, Africa, and a step-up of activity regarding NoKo and Iran. I doubt there will be direct talks (involving the president) in the latter two cases because the president would have to believe that any such talks could be fruitful, and there's no reason to think that right now.
sorry I think you meant "theres no reason to think the President thinks that right now" ;)
Well I hope, at least, that there will be true initiatives towards peace between Israel and Palestine (and that Israeli planes will stop flying in combat formation over French units in Lebanon). Would be good to see some movement on Africa and (this is wishful thinking) climate change.
But we shouldn’t forget that you do not teach an old dog new tricks…I doubt Bush will do anything too surprising, even on Israel.
Sigh…the world suffers from a great deficiency in statesmen…
Actually, you're right... I didn't mean that there's no reason to think the president thinks that. I just elided the perspective for some unknown reason.
But I wouldn't be too quick to underestimate the president. The latter part of two-term presidencies has often been a time of significant international undertakings, e.g. Nixon, Reagan, Clinton.
You're probably right not to think there'll be much movement on Kyoto-like measures, but the president is passionate about Africa (particularly AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa). The Bush administration has far eclipsed any previous president's commitment to fighting AIDS there, and it's an issue where there is near-consensus about involvement. It's something he cares about, it's a political winner at home, it's a political winner on the international scene, it's the right thing to do -- all that should portend significant attention from the POTUS. But that's just a prediction, and I could be completely wrong.
I mean I did... ah crap, I've been reading for the last 14 hours, cut me some slack.
Re: AIDS in SSA. There's no doubt that America's enthusiastic involvement in tackling the problem is a blessing. However I find myself troubled by the United States' imposition of an ideological stance in combating the spread of AIDS against widely known best practice.
Obviously I'm talking about the promotion of abstinence as the only means of preventing the spread of AIDS, as opposed to the combined approach adopted so successfully in Uganda. I don't think there's room for people to moralise about sexual habits when lives are on the line.
Post a Comment
<< Home