Don't miss YaYa123's post #32 regarding Charles Krauthammer.
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my FoxFan list. *Warning: This can be a high-volume ping list at times.
Posted on 03/06/2005 4:34:35 PM PST by quidnunc
Jon Stewart, the sage of Comedy Central, is one of the few to be honest about it. "What if Bush … has been right about this all along? I feel like my world view will not sustain itself and I may … implode." Daniel Schorr, another critic of the Bush foreign policy, ventured, a bit more grudgingly, that Bush "may have had it right."
Right on what? That America, using power harnessed to democratic ideals, could begin a transformation of the Arab world from endless tyranny and intolerance to decent governance and democratization. Two years ago, shortly before the invasion of Iraq, I argued in these pages that forcefully deposing Saddam Hussein was, more than anything, about America "coming ashore" to effect a "pan-Arab reformation" — a dangerous, "risky and, yes, arrogant" but necessary attempt to change the very culture of the Middle East, to open its doors to democracy and modernity.
The Administration went ahead with this great project knowing it would be hostage to history. History has begun to speak. Elections in Afghanistan, a historic first. Elections in Iraq, a historic first. Free Palestinian elections producing a moderate leadership, two historic firsts. Municipal elections in Saudi Arabia, men only, but still a first. In Egypt, demonstrations for democracy — unheard of in decades — prompting the dictator to announce free contested presidential elections, a historic first.
-snip-
"They were right that Bush doesn't have a deep grounding in history"
President Bush majored in history at Yale. He knows more history than his detractors put together
&&&
Also, he reads vociferously, and a good deal of his reading seems to be about historical figures, particularly American presidents.
This is not a stupid or uninformed man. He is not a smooth talker, and, in their arrogance, his media detractors equate their own glibness with superior critical thinking skills. There are many kinds of "intelligence" and facility with language is but one of them.
I want to hear the lamentations of his women.
&&
LOL!
...Common sense.
**
You are so right.
Thank you for your service, BTW.
I would have to disagree with that. He may have a better grounding in history than any president since Teddy Roosevelt. He was after all a History major at Yale. It would appear he, like Reagan, also has that rare gift that allows him to see the big picture while others focus on the minutia.
Things are going so well that there is a tendency to forget about all the "experts". Just a reminder for some time in the future that all these people were no only wrong but actively pulling us in the wrong direction. The real rubes it turns out are the sophisticated elites accustomed to acquiescence to their exalted opinions.
He is a lot more glib than he wishes to appear.
He does have the Bush family 'English as a Second language' syndrome, but his use of 'nukular' for 'nuclear' and 'athalete' for 'athlete' are affectations he uses deliberately to help his detractors misunderestimate him.
So9
Krauthammer is one of my favorites, as well.
How are you, friend? Remember me from the Gore War?
... as if I was poking the eyes of all the world's tyrants ...
$$
Wow! Gave me goosebumps. Thanks.
You're welcome.
If Bigg Red = The Big Red One (1st Infantry Division), then thank you for your service as well.
...affectations he uses deliberately to help his detractors misunderestimate him.
***
Source?
No, sorry, I have never served. At the time I chose my screen name I had not even heard of the 1st ID, let alone its nickname. :-) Others at FR have also assumed this connection, BTW.
My screen name is just one of the nicknames that the husband has for me.
I know the family.
SO9
I know the family.
**
I am so envious! It is my dream to one day meet W.
The Bushes are so decent and compassionate. I know that many people here revere Reagan. He was a great president, but I think that Bush is even greater, and, in addition to being a brilliant world leader, he is a devoted family man like his father.
The main failing in politics that Bush 41 had was that he was too polite and kind to understand the kind of dishonest and despicable campaign that the Arkansas scumbag and his people were waging. BTW, why is he letting Clinton use him in this tsunami project? Every time I see them together, I become ill. And, this morning, I had to hear that BJ kindly gave the only bed on the jet to 41!! Double barf!
Absolutely! My image is of you, and your DH, with that Freepin'fantabulous 'horn'!
You're kiddng, right? IIRC he opposes embryonic stem cell research. These two views seem hard to reconcile.
Don't miss YaYa123's post #32 regarding Charles Krauthammer.
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my FoxFan list. *Warning: This can be a high-volume ping list at times.
Thanks for the ping!
Great article! Don't miss YaYa123's post #32 also, regarding Dr. Krauthammer.
From February 2004 speech to AEI Democratic Realism
In a world of terrorists, terrorist states and weapons of mass destruction, the option of preemption is especially necessary. In the bipolar world of the Cold War, with a stable non-suicidal adversary, deterrence could work. Deterrence does not work against people who ache for heaven. It does not work against undeterrables. And it does not work against undetectables: nonsuicidal enemy regimes that might attack through clandestine means--a suitcase nuke or anonymously delivered anthrax. Against both undeterrables and undetectables, preemption is the only possible strategy.
Moreover, the doctrine of preemption against openly hostile states pursuing weapons of mass destruction is an improvement on classical deterrence. Traditionally, we deterred the use of WMDs by the threat of retaliation after we’d been attacked--and that’s too late; the point of preemption is to deter the very acquisition of WMDs in the first place.
Whether or not Iraq had large stockpiles of WMDs, the very fact that the United States overthrew a hostile regime that repeatedly refused to come clean on its weapons has had precisely this deterrent effect. We are safer today not just because Saddam is gone, but because Libya and any others contemplating trafficking with WMDs, have--for the first time--seen that it carries a cost, a very high cost.
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.