Posted on 11/22/2003 4:19:52 PM PST by Pokey78
Would you believe it? Not only can that Texan halfwit speak in proper sentences, he is even capable of reading a good speech and not fluffing his lines. It only goes to show what you can do with a speechwriter and some coaching. The response to President George W Bush's speech on Wednesday has been almost universally (and so typically Britishly) condescending. Few have criticised its content; since it ranks as one of the finest delivered by a visiting leader; that would be a sneer too far. Instead, reaction has been surprise, either feigned or genuine, that he managed to speak for so long, so well.
Mary Dejevsky, writing in The Independent, was typical: "Whoever has been coaching George Bush in oratory deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom (and a congratulatory glass of champagne)." Almost the entire British chattering class seems to be animated by the same deep-seated contempt for Mr Bush. Even when confronted by the evidence of their own eyes and ears, that he is a thoughtful, charming, convincing, eloquent, intelligent, forceful leader, they cannot bring themselves to believe that he is as he seems. And when they do witness such positive traits, they are clearly being hoodwinked. As The Guardian began its leader on Thursday: "Conscious that he has a bit of catching up do to, George Bush turned on the charm yesterday."
No, he didn't. He spoke as he always does: with a clarity of moral and political purpose unmatched by any American politician since Ronald Reagan, and with a charm that all who have met him confirm is entirely natural. The speech should hardly have come as a surprise. After all, he spoke just as eloquently when interviewed by Sir David Frost last Sunday. But until now the chatterers have chosen neither to listen nor to see. Last week they had no alternative, and so decided it was a one-off.
What such attitudes really reveal, however, is not how much they loathe President Bush but the reality of - I choose my words carefully - anti-Americanism in Britain. It is a phrase that has been bandied about far too loosely of late and is usually intended - and taken - to mean a loathing and hatred of all things, and people, American.
Real anti-Americanism - the sort that lies behind so much of the hostility to President Bush - isn't about hating burgers and Matt Monro. It is far more subtle. The really damaging anti-Americanism - because it blinds its sufferers to reality - derives from that characteristically British sneering superiority which so permeates metropolitan and media circles. It is the conviction that the arriviste who has moved in next door with his flashy car and his gauche ex-model wife may have more money, own the business and be getting more sex, but he lacks what really matters: class. That Bush fellow is just so typically American: crude and unsophisticated.
The Sunday after the World Trade Centre attack, John Humphrys paraded the full scorn of the superior Briton, attacking the likes of George Bush who "damn those who did it as evil, as though there is nothing more to say, as though we still believe in a devil with a forked tail. Perhaps President Bush truly does - his Christianity is of a pretty fundamental variety."
It is not just President Bush. His predecessor, Bill Clinton, was equally American; just as fundamentally uncouth and unable to resist his gross appetites. But we humoured him, since he spoke our sort of language. What really offends about George Bush is that what you see is what you get, and what you see is a genuine American who makes no effort to be anything else. We can put up with Americans who seem ashamed to be American. Woe betide them, however, if they are proud of it. They will have to put up with our weapon of choice: the condescending sneer.
I've been waiting to see a side by side of these pictures. Thanks for posting them.
Every major speech of President Bush seems to be met with the same response by the media, that it was extremely well written and even well delivered. They always act like it was the first time he was even coherent. I would match his speeches in Prague, after September 11 at the National Cathedral and at the UN, at the UN last year and now in England with the best 5 speeches of any other President in my long memory.
This last line of the article is probably it's best!
I'll see their condescending sneer and raise them a can of whup-ass.
That is a great article. I just pinged it too ! ...
I wondered at that one too. Grammatically it's got to be wrong, but perhaps it's a sly dig, understood only in Britain, at the parlance of upperclass Brits.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.