George Bush's Article in NYTIMES.
September 11, 2002 5:41 AM   Subscribe

George Bush's Article in NYTIMES. I was surprised to see an article by the prez on nytimes.com. We are used to presidents communicating through TV- but there the speech is picked up by all major channels in that case. It seems odd to see a sitting president use one newspaper to put forward a viewpoint. Perhaps, Al Gore's articles in the same space spurred dubya. Oh, by the way, what did you think of the story? Is this the work of a speechwriter or do you think it is genuine? Did everyone notice the absence of the word Iraq in this article? (The customary apology for the nytimes post applies. I believe you can still register as metafilter, metafilter.)
posted by SandeepKrishnamurthy (36 comments total)

 
I'm sure the byline should be by George Bush's scriptwriters.
posted by davebushe at 5:46 AM on September 11, 2002


Even free nations have been forced to reexamine the nature of their commitment to freedom — to determine if this commitment is a reflection of convention and culture or the universal demand of conscience and morality.

Try both?
posted by zygoticmynci at 5:49 AM on September 11, 2002


"We preserve this peace by building good relations among the world's great powers..." "...unites America's allies" "With our allies..." That would be nice if it were true.

We believe that the deliberate murder of innocent civilians and the oppression of women are everywhere and always wrong. And we refuse to ignore or appease the aggression and brutality of evil men. Like in Saudi Arabia?

Words are just words. His actions do not reflect the words that were written for him.
posted by quirked at 6:04 AM on September 11, 2002


Interesting - here in the UK, the Prime Minister and the other big guns of the Cabinet often (well, maybe 2/3 times a year each) use the newspapers to get something across. It used to just be in the more 'serious' papers (Guardian, Times, Independent, Telegraph) but Blair has taken to using the popular 'tabloid' press (Sun, Mirror, Mail) for articles as well.
posted by humuhumu at 6:07 AM on September 11, 2002


The title says nothing (which says it all): "Securing Freedom's Triumph." And everything about this sentence makes me queasy: "The defense of peace is a difficult struggle of uncertain duration."

I noticed today at the ceremonies (yes, I just had to watch for some reason, but it's not even light yet on the west coast where I live) that Pataki read the Gettysburg Address. It's as if the politicians of today could never be that eloquent, so they repeat an eloquent speech, which was, of course, given to dedicate a military cemetary nearly 140 years ago. As many people already know, Lincoln himself didn't think much of the speech and the papers didn't take much note. Geedubya should be so lucky, but his will be forgotten.

Now they are reading the names of all the victims. It's a windy day. This will take some time.
posted by krinklyfig at 6:22 AM on September 11, 2002


"George W. Bush is the 43rd president."

Just in case you didn't know, apparently...
posted by Mwongozi at 6:23 AM on September 11, 2002


...or were wishing otherwise...
posted by UnReality at 6:28 AM on September 11, 2002


If only we had a president who knew how to make a speech.
posted by dayvin at 6:41 AM on September 11, 2002


Humuhumu- Tony Blair wrote in to the NY Post this Monday.

Here in NY, the Post is about the same as your Mirror or Mail- mostly gossip, opinionated reporting, and a massive sports section.
posted by remlapm at 6:47 AM on September 11, 2002


Maybe he chose the Times to give NYC sort of a 'gift' of exclusivity after they incurred the brunt of the attack?

Just showing support for the city, I'd guess.
posted by El_Gray at 6:57 AM on September 11, 2002


He chose the times because they're the 700 lb. gorilla of journalism. And I like them unreservedly, by the way.
posted by gsteff at 8:07 AM on September 11, 2002


Over the past few days, there have been comments asking about reaction one year after Pearl Harbor. Well, this gent was around then and has some interesting observations.
posted by SteveInMaine at 8:07 AM on September 11, 2002


I didn't realize the New York Times accepted copy written in crayon.
posted by crunchland at 8:12 AM on September 11, 2002


"limits on the power of the state"

Has Ashcroft heard of this yet?

" If only we had a president who knew how to make a speech."

Amen. This is exactly what my thread yesterday was inferring (although I did not state it directly.) Having a dummy in the White House has it's disadvantages. Imagine what Kennedy or Lincoln or Roosevelt or Jefferson .... would have done with such a moment in history .... an excellent chance for the inspiration of everyone just passed by (giant sucking sound.)

"Is our children learning?" [yet]
posted by nofundy at 8:20 AM on September 11, 2002


Oh, cut him some slack, already. It's Sept. 11, and it's NYC's top newspaper, already.
posted by raysmj at 8:23 AM on September 11, 2002


Well, this gent was around then and has some interesting observations.

Hey, my crappy hometown newspaper makes the big league.
posted by goethean at 8:34 AM on September 11, 2002


already.
posted by crunchland at 8:48 AM on September 11, 2002


Scriptwriters? Crayon? Metafilter's Fourth Grade is out today.
posted by dhartung at 9:11 AM on September 11, 2002


Pardon me, but that crayon line made me laugh heartily. It's good to laugh when your heart is breaking.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 9:40 AM on September 11, 2002


It's not uncommon for sitting presidents to have Op-Ed pieces in the New York Times. I've seen it several times in the past fifteen years or so.

[unrelated] quote: Abraham Lincoln's speeches were not just inspirational prose. They were bold statements of new national goals in a time of real, terrible war. The Second Inaugural Address dared to herald the reconciliation that must follow Northern victory in the Civil War. The primacy of the commitment to end slavery was the point of Lincoln's exaltation of freedom in the Gettysburg Address. But when the great Lincoln speeches are ritually cited, or recycled for commemoration, they have become completely emptied of meaning. They are now gestures of nobility, of greatness of spirit. The reasons for their greatness are irrelevant.
posted by alms at 10:17 AM on September 11, 2002


Well, it just proves Andrew Sullivan's point that the New York Times is a bastion of filthy leftist propaganda, committed to demolishing Bush's war effort by, um, printing the President's own words as an op-ed. Obviously, Bush and his press team think so as well.
posted by riviera at 11:12 AM on September 11, 2002


>Scriptwriters? Crayon? Metafilter's Fourth Grade is out today.

Oh come off it, Dan. You can't seriously be defending Bush's impressive English abilities, can you?

The defense of peace is a difficult struggle

Fight for Peace! Christ, now that's a joke I recall from the fourth grade! Some of the content free crap in that piece actually sounds clumsy enough to have emerged from Shrub's evil little noggin, but I would still eat my damn hat if he actually did write it.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:41 PM on September 11, 2002


The op-ed piece is devoid of real meaty content (my inner reading voice sounded sort of like the teacher in "Peanuts"), but I'm not at all sure that Bill's would've been much better. Whether he wrote it means little or nothing to me. The problem lies as much with the culture of politics today as anything.

Meantime, my point in asking people here to cut him some slack was to say, C'mon, don't insult him for reasons that are more personal than political today. (Political critiques are more than acceptable.) That's kinda tacky. The guy's out busting his ass all over the DC-to-NYC megalopolis, sitting through one solemn, maudlin or depressing ceremony after another. Yeah, he asked for the job, even (insert Florida reference here), but today it's gotta be like listening to "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald" for 12 hours straight, only with more presumably authentic emotion involved. We could ask more of our leaders than just to along. Y'know, they could lead and whatnot. Still . . .

Oh! Forgot. It's fine to go back to slamming him for no particularly good reason tomorrow.
posted by raysmj at 4:49 PM on September 11, 2002


I'll cut the bastard a break the minute he resigns in disgrace.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:28 PM on September 11, 2002


Well, OK, that's a political attack. If you'd care to say why, besides that he writes in crayon or is "a dummy," that's perfectly mature and worthy of respect.
posted by raysmj at 7:06 PM on September 11, 2002


OK. Here's a list, not by any means exhaustive, of things done by the Bush Administration with which I take issue, all of which predate 9/11. Post 9/11 - don't even get me started. I did not create this list.


Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops.
* Cut federal spending on libraries by $39 million.
* Cut $35 million in funding for doctors to get advanced pediatric training.
* Cut by 50% funding for research into renewable energy sources.
* Revoked rules that reduced the acceptable levels of arsenic in drinking water.
* Blocked rules that would require federal agencies to offer bilingual assistance to non-English speaking persons.
* Proposed to eliminate new marine protections for the Channel Islands and the coral reefs of northwest Hawaii. (San Francisco Chronicle, April 6, 2001)
* Cut funding by 28% for research into cleaner, more efficient cars and trucks.
* Suspended rules that would have strengthened the government's ability to deny contracts to companies that violated workplace safety, environmental and other federal laws.
* OK'd Interior Department appointee Gale Norton to send out letters to state officials soliciting suggestions for opening up national monuments for oil and gas drilling, coal mining, and foresting.
* Appointed John Negroponte - an un-indicted high-level Iran Contra figure- to the post of United Nations ambassador.
* Abandoned a campaign pledge to invest $100 million for rain forest conservation.
* Reduced by 86% the Community Access Program for public hospitals, clinics and providers of care for people without insurance.
* Rescinded a proposal to increase public access to information about the potential consequences resulting from chemical plant accidents.
* Suspended rules that would require hardrock miners to clean up sites on Western public lands.
* Cut $60 million from a Boy's and Girl's Clubs of America program for public housing.
* Proposed to eliminate a federal program designed to help communities (and successfully used in Seattle) prepare for natural disasters.
* Pulled out of the 1997 Kyoto Treaty global warming agreement.
* Cut $200 million of work force training for dislocated workers.
* Eliminated funding for the Wetlands Reserve Program, which encourages farmers to maintain wetlands habitat on their property.
* Cut program to provide childcare to low-income families as they move from welfare to work.
* Cut a program that provided prescription contraceptive coverage to federal employees (though it still pays for Viagra).
* Cut $700 million in capital funds for repairs in public housing.
* Appointed Otto Reich - an un-indicted high level Iran Contra figure - to Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs.
* Cut Environmental Protection Agency budget by $500 million.
* Proposed to curtail the ability of groups to sue in order to get an animal placedon the Endangered Species List.
* Rescinded rule that mandated increased energy-saving efficiency regulations for central air conditioners and heat pumps.
* Repealed workplace ergonomic rules designed to improve worker health and safety.
* Abandoned campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide (CO2), the waste gas that contributes to global warming.
* Banned federal aid to international family planning programs that offer abortion counseling with other independent funds.
* Closed White House Office for Women's Health Initiatives and Outreach.
* Nominated David Lauriski - ex-mining company executive - to post of Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health.
* O.K.'d Interior Secretary Gale Norton to go forth with a controversial plan to auction oil and gas development tracts off the coast eastern of Florida.
* Announced intention to open up Montana's Lewis and Clark National Forest to oil and drilling.
* Proposes to re-draw boundaries of nation's monuments, which would technicallyallow oil and gas drilling "outside" of national monuments.
* Gutted White House AIDS Office.
* Renegotiating free trade agreement with Jordan to eliminate safeguards for theenvironment and workers' rights.
* Will no longer seek guidance from The American Bar Association in recommendations for the federal judiciary appointments.
* Appointed recycling foe Lynn Scarlett as Undersecretary of the Interior.
* Took steps to abolish the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
* Cut the Community Oriented Policing Services program.
* Allowed Interior Secretary Gale Norton to shelve citizen-led grizzly bear re-introductionplan scheduled for Idaho and Montana wilderness.
* Continues to hold up federal funding for stem cell research projects.
* Makes sure convicted misdemeanor drug users cannot get financial aid for college, though convicted murderers can.
* Refused to fund continued cleanup of uranium-slag heap in Utah.
* Refused to fund continued litigation of the government's tobacco company lawsuit.
* Proposed a $2 trillion tax cut, of which 43% will go to the wealthiest 1% of Americans.
* Signed a bill making it harder for poor and middle-class Americans to file for bankruptcy, even in the case of daunting medical bills.
* Appointed a Vice President quoted as saying "If you want to do something about carbon dioxide emissions, then you ought to build nuclear power plants."Vice President Dick Cheney on "Meet the Press."
* Appointed Diana "There is no gender gap in pay" Roth to the Councilof Economic Advisers. Boston Globe, March 28, 2001
* Appointed Kay Cole James - an opponent of affirmative action-to direct the Office of Personnel Management.
* Cut $15.7 million earmarked for states to investigate cases of child abuse and neglect.
* Helped kill a law designed to make it tougher for teenagers to get credit cards.
* Proposed elimination of the "Reading is Fundamental" program that gives free books to poor children.
* Is pushing for development of small nuclear weapons to attack deeply buried targets-weapons, which would violate the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
* Proposes to nominate Jeffrey Sutton-attorney responsible for the recent case weakening the Americans with Disabilities Act-to federal appeals court judgeship.
* Proposes to reverse regulation protecting 60 million acres of national forest from logging and road building.
* Eliminated funding for the "We the People" education program which taught school children about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights andcitizenship.
* Appointed John Bolton - who opposes nonproliferation treaties and the U.N. - to Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security.
* Nominated Linda Fisher - an executive with Monsanto - for the number two job at the Environmental Protection Agency.
* Nominated Michael McConnell-leading critic of the separation of church and state-to a federal judgeship.
* Nominated Terrence Boyle - ardent opponent of civil rights - to a federal judgeship.
* Canceled 2004 deadline for automakers to develop prototype high mileage cars.
* Nominated Harvey Pitts - lawyer for teen sex video distributor-to head SEC.
* Nominated John Walters - strong opponent of prison drug treatment programs-for Drug Czar. Washington Post, May 16, 2001.
* Nominated J. Steven Giles - an oil and coal lobbyist - for Deputy Secretary of the Interior.
* Nominated Bennett Raley - who advocates repealing the Endangered Species Act- for Assistant Secretary for Water and Science.
* Is seeking the dismissal of class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. against Japan by Asian women forced to work as sex slaves during WWII.
* Earmarked $4 million in new federal grant money for HIV and drug abuse prevention programs to go only to religious groups and not secular equivalents.
* Reduced by 40% the Low Income Home Assistance Program for low-income individuals who need assistance paying energy bills.
* Nominated Ted Olson-who has repeatedly lied about his involvement with the Scaiffe- funded "Arkansas Project" to bring down Bill Clinton - for Solicitor General.
* Nominated Terrance Boyle -foe of civil rights - to a federal judgeship.
* Proposes to ease permit process - including environmental considerations - for refinery, nuclear and hydroelectric dam construction. Washington Post, May 18, 2001.
* Proposes to give government the authority to take private property through eminent domain for power lines.
* Proposes that $1.2 billion in funding for alternative renewable energy comefrom selling oil and gas lease tracts in the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve.
* Plans on serving genetically engineered foods at all official government functions.
* Forced out Forest Service chief Mike Dombeck and appointed a timber industry lobbyist


That's a fair start on reasons I would like to see Shrub ousted, no?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:36 PM on September 11, 2002


Man, you've got a whole database complied? Can you do regression analysis with it?
posted by raysmj at 8:03 PM on September 11, 2002


On the issue of oddness mentioned in the FPP:

The online NYT archives only go back as far as 1996, but it shows that in that between January 1, 1996 and the end of his term Clinton (or a scriptwriter) wrote three editorials.

May 23, 1999
September 24, 2000
January 14, 2001

He wrote another one, shortly after leaving office, on February 18, 2001.
posted by obfusciatrist at 8:13 PM on September 11, 2002


stavros: My objection has less to do with the defense of Dubya, who is certainly neither orator nor prosodist, but with the low-water-mark being set by the left wing with regard to its criticism. See, he got through Harvard and Yale, but he's so dumb, he writes with crayon! Wow. I can see that took a lot of thought. Yet to many, at least in venues like MeFi, this is seen as perfectly acceptable political commentary -- even insightful.

And liberals wonder why they lose elections.
posted by dhartung at 11:56 PM on September 11, 2002


Some people have no sense of humor.
posted by crunchland at 12:28 AM on September 12, 2002


Fair enough, dhartung. And my hat (uneaten, thus far) is off to you for consistently trying to keep the level of discourse higher than "Oh yeah? Sez you!"

Kudos, even if we don't often agree.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:16 AM on September 12, 2002


Oh, come on. You're going to give him a pass on the fact that he's confusing true political commentary with something that's just a joke? Add to that his own indiscretion ad hominem slur about liberals losing elections, which is a stupid and outright lie. I mean, I can understand if you don't want to get into a pointless slugfest, but to give kudos to the guy is a bit much.
posted by crunchland at 6:06 AM on September 12, 2002


And liberals wonder why they lose elections.

Hardly. All the jokes about Clinton's cock, Hillary's malevolence and Chelsea's appearance didn't matter for much when it came to stealing the last one. Holier than thou is out of fashion these days, and some people haven't worked it out.
posted by riviera at 7:20 AM on September 12, 2002


riviera: Yes, and Clinton actually did OK - well, more consistently well in the polls than anyone would have ever imagined - by putting himself mostly above the fray of all that. No reason the technique couldn't work again. Being holier-than-thou has worked pretty well for Republicans besides, *in combination with* being a-holish, but not all the time. It seems to me, though, that being confident, and beyond being a-holish or holier-than-thou in your rehetoric, can work just as well. (OK. Clinton let others do dirty work for him, but never mind that part. It threatened to backfire regardless - insinuating that Monica was a slut, psychotic or whatnot, say.)
posted by raysmj at 9:05 AM on September 12, 2002


Well, crunchy old chap, I'd have to say that my kudos are given not because of anything said in this thread, but as a result of a few years of reading what Dan has to say, and often admiring the way he says it.

I don't believe, as many seem to, that political arguments are meant to be won - I don't think they can be, mostly. I argue in part because I enjoy it, and in part because I learn from it - learn what those who for some reason or other believe things that are often diametrically opposed to my viewpoint have to say, and why. Dhartung consistently and intelligently presents reasons for what he says (most of the the time, at least), and even though we disagree on details and conclusions, I welcome the data.

There are many others around here whose words I appreciate greatly, as they help me learn, from all corners of the political arena. I was just feeling in a warm, fuzzy mood upthread, is all. It's not all violent clash, or shouldn't be, I don't think.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:29 PM on September 12, 2002


You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.
posted by crunchland at 7:01 PM on September 12, 2002


« Older On hallowed ground....  |  "In the most recent issue of t... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments