Posted on 02/28/2006 8:58:32 PM PST by bayourant
http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=88747 As we prepare to welcome the leader of the world’s most powerful republic, it behooves us to make sure that we grapple with facts, not just biased opinions. It is unfortunate that so much of the information about the US is derived by our elites from the eastern seaboard, Left-leaning media who are on the opposite side of the American political spectrum from George W. Bush and who therefore have a vested interest in opposing and disparaging him.
The images of Bush they have succeeded in planting internationally are that Bush is dim-witted, a simple-minded religious fanatic, a supporter of a rapacious plutocracy. None of these are based on facts. But like all propaganda, there is a feeling that repeated often enough, loudly enough, it’ll become the accepted truth.
Let us take a look at the facts. The Bush family is as elitist as they get in America. Bush’s grandfather was a Republican senator from Connecticut. His son, George Bush Sr, took the decision literally to move the family “west”. This may seem like an accident. But what an intelligent and fortuitous accident it was. They moved to the southwest just as this part of the US was gaining demographically. The likelihood of a president of the US bobbing up from Connecticut, with its declining population, is pretty low. Texas on the other hand has been for the last 35 years on the rise economically and politically. The Bush family moved to Texas just as the state was moving from over a century of Democratic domination to becoming a bastion of the Republicans. Incidentally, a branch of the Bush family represented by the president’s younger brother has moved to Florida, another state with burgeoning demography and a flourishing economy. The family’s uncanny ability to anticipate the future and “move” to where the future will happen needs no better proof.
President Bush attended Yale and Harvard Business School. Critics will of course make snide remarks that this was on account of family connections. While that may help to some extent, to be dismissive of his attendance of top-class academic establishments would arguably be one more silly under-estimation of the man. Despite representing what is viewed by many as a political party committed to the white Protestant cause, Bush has reached out to the Hispanic community with intelligence and sensitivity. If nothing else, this represents another wise anticipation of demographic inflexion. The Republican Party would condemn itself to irrelevance if it fails to co-opt the growing Hispanic population. At considerable risk to his popularity with xenophobes within his own party, Bush has proposed a Guest Worker programme which is immigrant-friendly and responds to the concerns of the Hispanic voter. His ability to re-fashion himself as a “non-elitist” or to convert a marginal first term victory into a decisive one in the second round are not acts of the politically inept. Those who think of him that way seriously “mis-underestimate” him!
Bush has shown a broad-mindedness and inclusiveness in his appointm-ents that completely demolishes the argument that he is merely a mouthpiece for evangelical Christians. He may be a sincere, pious, believer in his faith, but he’s consistently stood for the separation of church and state and for the inclusiveness of all groups. This may be for principled reasons or because he his politically smart. The net effect has been positive. His executive and judicial appointments embrace Catholics (also new entrant into the stable of Republican supporters), Jews and African-Americans. Note that both his secretaries of state (the senior-most cabinet members) have been African-American. His surgical approach to Senator Trent Lott when he resurrected long-forgotten racial antagonisms is a classic example of heightened sensitivity.
In foreign policy, Bush has the reputation deservedly or otherwise of cold-shouldering Europe (or is it just Old Europe?) and reaching out to China and India. Again, one sees the same knack of grasping the future rather than swimming in the glue of the past. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and he have created an Indo-US CEO forum. Contrast this with Chirac’s clumsy response to the Mittal-Arcelor deal. China is the economic powerhouse of the future and India is headed the same way. Bush’s visit to China highlighted this despite the dozens of reservations and differences on Taiwan and other irritants. He was warmly received by the Chinese elite, an important lesson for his Indian counterparts.
As a betting man, the very fact that Bush is positive about India means that it is quite in order to go long on the Indian stockmarket. His ability to spot the trend has a tested track record. It is equally important to pay attention to the fact that almost instinctively he is on our side on a variety of issues, be it the approach to Islamist terrorism or the approach to nuclear power as a viable, even desirable energy source for the world. He has maintained a clear distance from ecology fundamentalists who would deny India nuclear fuel and at the same time hector us not to burn high-sulphur coal. How exactly are we supposed to provide for an energy-starved population who do not aspire to remain permanently poor?
The one argument I find most entertaining is that he is doing all this for the good of the US. Of course he is. That is what makes his approach so credible and self-sustaining. He has been elected by Americans to further their interests and that’s what he is doing. If he can find that doing business with India makes sense within that agenda, it seems to me that we have all the elements of a relationship not based on frothy rhetoric but on sound convergence of interests. It is in this spirit of intelligent practicality, conscious of our vital interests that we should “do business” with this pragmatic Texan.
Jaithirth Rao is chairman and CEO, Mphasis
That was a GREAT article!
Well, you don't like Bush, how would you like perusing the FBI files with Hillary?
Smart, very smart. Thanks for the post.
China "economic powerhouse" of the future? Being a CEO
one can only worship at the divine altar of "The Bottom-Line". Slave labor is attractive to this guy, the rest of him seems ok but this part is repugnant.
YEah, I thought it was pretty good. Esp since the poor Prez is taking such a bashing. People need to be reminded that this Country has not only been blessed with a smart and decent guy but a pretty darn good political family. UNfort, the MSM will prob take a big yawn on a trip where BUsh will be treated like Royalty and with genuine affection. Heck I wish he would spend all week over in India. Help get some of this nonsense off the front page and also educate Americans about a vital part of the World
What a great and pragmatic essay.
Hopefully the wages will rise there over time at least thats what the theory is
bttt
Wrong thread?
"Hopefully the wages will rise there over time at least thats what the theory is"
Yes, I think wages will rise in India through trade. And it doesn't mean a depression of wages here either. People sometimes forget that you can make more jobs along with more product. The standard of living can rise in both countries through trade. It is not a zero sum game. It never has been. World output is a lot higher now than it was 100 years ago (per capita and in total).
What bothers me about Bush's position is this; today, regarding the DPW deal, he said that he wouldn't do anything that would bring harm to the nation or something to that effect.
Well, and this just in, WTH's he been doing with the borders and can any sane person say that the issue there is not harmful to our nation? Home and property values have practically vaporized in some border towns and regions, illegals pour over the borders like water over Niagara Falls, who knows who is coming in, criminals, terrorists, etc.
W says something like he said today, but IMO he doesn't have any credibility, but here's everyone just lopping up the slop as if it's going out of style. Politics at it's finest.
Now I'm tempted to believe that this DPW deal is fine. But until we get some information we just don't know. We've trusted many, many, many nations in many, many, many situations over the decades to our shame. The Soviet Union, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, China, Russia (after the USSR), and many others.
Yet, we continue to behave as if everyone's honest in diplomacy.
If W wouldn't do anything to allow harm to come to our nation, then is he blind on the border issue? Apparently so.
Call me crazy, but he has little credibility in this department. Again, it may be fine, then again, it may not be, and my credibility with Bush pretty much ended since the last election. He's neglecting a good chunk of his responsibilities as President including learning how to handle the media, and he's certainly not the conservative leaning president that he appears to have been moreso in the first term.
P.S. He's done fine in the WOT overseas, but his grades at home are average at best, flunking at worst.
As we prepare to welcome the leader of the world’s most powerful republic, it behooves us to make sure that we grapple with facts, not just biased opinions.
That wouldn't bother me so much if they didn't bend over constantly for the Arab elite.
Oh I dont know about flunking. The economy doing well. It does appear that test scores are going up.
Well I am at this point for the port deal for a variety of reasons. The immigration issue I know is a tough one. I avoid alot of those threads because unfort they become a little extreme. Its a shame because I share the concerns esp about security. There has got to be a solution to it. A solution that makes us secure, allows foreign workers to come in, doesnt inflame the Hispanic community and make us a minority party forever, etc. Former Sen Simpson would say to the effect that something needs to be done on the topic but both the left and right go off the deep end thats its impossible. I guess thats why no President could get it under control. We need to do something thats for sure that recognizes all the interest involved. One reason I hate to touch the issue is that it always seems like a "white Repub thing". Why we cant get some Republican Hispanics on the front lines of this I dont know.
In the past the issue has been handled badly without the required empathy. Now if a Dem like Richardson and other Dems on the Border could give Bush some cover we could prob talk about it and come to a solution.
W stands for Winner
My post obviously had to to with the WOT and national security. Most conservatives are PO'd at W's lack of attention to border issues!
Yeah, the economy is fine. But that can be highly volatile. Imagine simultaneous terrorist attacks in several big cities; you don't think that would have a drastic negative impact on our economy, either temporarily or more than likely medium to perhaps even long-term?
Even little things such a a bomb going off (Israel style) in say a mall or other public place, even if not killing thousands, perhaps only dozens could easily spark economic concerns.
Gotta keep the priorities straight here in terms of what has the greater propensity to influence what.
Another disturbing thing about Bush is that he hasn't used a veto yet in what, over five years. Gov't. spending is going through the roof.
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.