Bush's Unexamined Life (A Canadian pedagogue enlightens the great unwashed!)

There is a memorable photograph of John Fitzgerald Kennedy taken on Feb. 13, 1961, less than a month after he became president. He is on the telephone, pressing his hand to his forehead. His eyes are closed, his brow furrowed, his expression pained.

He has just learned that Patrice Lumumba, the premier of the Congo, had been assassinated shortly before Mr. Kennedy's inauguration. Mr. Kennedy is devastated — and the picture shows it.

One wonders how George W. Bush would have reacted. As the war in Iraq spun out of control, as the mother of a dead American soldier held a vigil near Mr. Bush's ranch in Texas, this president expressed no remorse or regret.

It is quite remarkable, really. The roadside bombs are becoming more deadly, the constitutional talks are crawling, Iran is flooding the country with jihadists, and the American-trained Iraqi soldiers and policemen are inept. Yet from Mr. Bush, who proclaimed the war over more than two years ago, there is no admission or acknowledgement of a policy gone awry. He simply insists, as he did again on Monday, that staying the course in Iraq will make America safer.

Then he returns to his vacation. He likes his holidays, Mr. Bush does. In fact, he has taken more time off in his first five years than any of his recent predecessors did in eight. While a distraught Cindy Sheehan stood outside his door, demanding an apology for sending her son to his death, the president cleared brush and rode his mountain bike. "It's also important for me to go on with my life," he said, "to keep a balanced life."

Fine. As president, Mr. Bush must maintain a certain distance. As historian Edmund Morris, the biographer of Theodore Roosevelt argues, Ms. Sheehan "cannot expect a commander-in-chief to emote on demand. … A president has to protect himself from emotional predators, or he'd be sucked dry within a week of taking office."

But that's not what we're talking about here. The question isn't whether Mr. Bush should "emote," proving that he feels Ms. Sheehan's pain, but whether he can empathize, understanding the anguish of sacrifice seen as unnecessary.

Empathy has never been Mr. Bush's strength. He sent scores of murderers to their deaths in Texas — during his six years as governor the state had the busiest death row in America — and he claimed he never lost a night's sleep. On one occasion, he is said to have mocked a woman's pathetic plea for clemency.

Mr. Bush is tough, self-disciplined and focused, which is desirable in a president. He is also stubborn, self-assured and impulsive, which is not. His character and comportment explain why the United States is in Iraq today, and why Iraq is going terribly wrong.

When Mr. Bush made the case for invading Iraq, he made several arguments: that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction; that there was a link between Iraq and Sept. 11; that the Americans would be greeted as liberators; that America had enough troops to do the job; that there was a plan for renewal and reconstruction.

It was on this basis that Americans largely supported the war. They believed their president and thought he could manage it.

We know that Mr. Bush was not up to this. He accepted bad intelligence. He rejected contrarian arguments. He ignored the warnings of his father and Colin Powell and isolated or discredited critics such as adviser Richard Clarke or diplomat Joseph Wilson. He did not marshal overwhelming force. He did not have a plan for the peace.

Had Mr. Bush asked the right questions, as Mr. Kennedy did in challenging the hawks during the Cuban Missile Crisis, he might have avoided this mess. But, untutored and inexperienced as he is, Mr. Bush didn't know how. He accepted arguments from the experts uncritically.

If democracy does come to the Middle East because of a renewed Iraq, it may be that the invasion will be seen as a good thing; as former Chinese premier Chou En-lai once said of the success of the French Revolution, it is too early to say. But it isn't too early to say that the post-war period was badly planned and badly executed, and Mr. Bush is to blame. For what he didn't do or say or ask, there is a cost. Life presents a bill, and Ms. Sheehan and others are paying it.

A year ago, during the presidential election, Mr. Bush persuaded Americans that he knew better on Iraq. Now, as his popularity plunges, they no longer believe or trust him, and the poor man hasn't the humility to realize it.

Andrew Cohen is a professor of journalism and international affairs at Carleton University.

His Cause Is Freedom
Contrary to columnist Andrew Cohen's opinion, George W. Bush is a man of courage and compassion who has led his people under the most difficult circumstances

There is a memorable photograph of President George W. Bush standing on a crushed and burned fire truck amidst the ruins of the World Trade Center just days after Sept. 11, 2001, when more than 3,000 of my countrymen and citizens of the world were killed in the most lethal — and cowardly — terrorist attacks in United States history.

It is a picture of our president holding a bullhorn and promising the weary rescue workers and the watching world that we would not back down, that terrorism would be defeated and the United States would lead the charge.

That same day, President Bush spent many hours in New York personally meeting, praying with and consoling the families of 9/11 victims.

I suppose that fact was forgotten when Carleton University professor Andrew Cohen wrote his column, "Bush's unexamined life," which appeared in Tuesday's Citizen.

Mr. Cohen began by citing a photo of a "brow furrowed … expression pained" President John F. Kennedy reacting to the news of an assassination to ponder whether President George W. Bush would react — or is capable of reacting — the same way.

This is Mr. Cohen's jumping off point to then attack the president over the war in Iraq.

The furrowed brow was all Mr. Cohen needed to confirm what he already believed about President Kennedy — that he was a good and compassionate president.

But when it comes to President Bush, apparently no picture, none of the countless acts of humanity and compassion the camera has captured during the Bush presidency matter, because Mr. Cohen can't move beyond the boundaries of his own bias.

I have met Mr. Cohen. I respect him. But he is dead wrong when it comes to his assessment of our president.

And I will make an assumption about Mr. Cohen: He is not a personal friend, colleague or acquaintance of the president. Yet Mr. Cohen offers a staggering indictment on the personal feelings of a man he does not know personally.

Well, Mr. Cohen, I do know President Bush. I know that his thoughts on terrorism and the war are diametrically opposed to everything you purport to understand about him.

For this president and the American people, 9/11 changed everything. We have not forgotten those who died on that dark day and every single waking moment of the Bush presidency since then has been dedicated to preventing another attack — and to eliminating the risk.

It is not lost on me and the majority of Americans that since 9/11 we have been successful in thwarting another attack. That is why the American people re-elected President Bush. They recognize that only time has passed since Sept. 2001 — not the danger.

And while you discuss a "lack of remorse" by the president, many Americans appreciate and stand by his resolve. No one likes war, and the war in Iraq is no exception. But as you noted, "life presents a bill."

So does freedom.

The blood of millions of Canadian and American soldiers in faraway lands gave us the privilege to publicly discuss the personal humility of President Bush.

As any student of history understands, liberating a country after generations of terror and tyranny takes years — sometimes decades. There are no quick fixes in Iraq. But to pull out now is unthinkable to President Bush, as it should be. To stay the course means sacrifice but the alternative is far worse.

Look what has happened in just two short years: We witnessed a national election in Iraq the naysayers promised us would never happen. We watched in awe as freedom-seeking Iraqis risked everything to vote. The Iraqi people seem to appreciate the precious gift of liberty better than some who've long enjoyed it.

Twenty-four months ago it was unthinkable that two rogue nations like Afghanistan and Iraq would be establishing democratic governments. Right now, Iraq is in the midst of writing its own constitution.

Those of us who know Mr. Bush know he has personally met with countless military families and he aches for all of them. He's also met with countless victims of Sept. 11 and those of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. Our president — along with the military he commands — understands defeating terrorism is the calling of our time. History will note whether we bravely answered freedom's call or let the next generation face the same horrors.

The great Winston Churchill once said, "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."

Thank God the men and women of Churchill's generation rejected the policy of appeasement. They understood there are just some things in life worth fighting for.

I am confident that history will judge this American president as one of the great liberators of all time. His cause — the cause of freedom — is far more important to President Bush, and to the millions of people around the world who support him, than is the ebb and flow of a "popularity" poll.

David H. Wilkins is the U.S. ambassador to Canada.

Defending the President of the United States

(David H. Wilkins in The Ottawa Citizen, August 25, 2005)
http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=8474467d-779e-4d5a-8c26-ad18768e3bb9

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.