Thursday,
February 3 2005
THE SOTU AND THE SUPERBOWL: I'm not going to bore you
with a review of the speech last night - the President finished
just over 14 hours ago and there's already been enough commentary
written about it to choke a horse. Instead, I'll bore you with
something completely different.
My
first thought after Bush finished speaking last night was, "he
did it again." Did what again, you ask? "Outperformed
expectations" and "delivered a strong performance"
are two of the most commonly heard cliches.
But
then it occurred to me how silly it was to think in those terms.
Bush ALWAYS delivers. In fact, with the exception of the first
presidential debate last year I can't think of another example
when Bush didn't come through in big moments. And he's faced more
than his share of big moments over the last four years.
Now
switch gears with me and think about the Superbowl. Think about
the players who will be taking the field this Sunday. If you had
to pick a player who reminded you most of President Bush and the
way he conducts himself, who would it be? It seems to me the
answer is so obvious it verges on making the question rhetorical.
Tom
Brady isn't the most physically gifted player around. He's not
flashy. He wasn't very highly regarded coming out of college (in
the 2000 draft, no less). But he's a tremendous leader, a relentless
competitor, and a ruthlessly disciplined and consistent player.
He as developed into the league's best quarterback and even at
the tender age of 27 he's already cemented his position as a first-ballot
Hall of Famer.
Now,
just for the sake of fun, consider the Democrats. Which players
would they represent? The answer isn't very obvious at all. Harry
Reid, who I'm sure is a very nice man, doesn't look like he should
be on the field at all - unless he was a referee or a member of
the chain gang.
Best
case scenario for Howard Dean would be to see him as a John Gruden-type
coach roaming the sidelines. Worse case Dean is a face-painted
fan in the 36th row who keeps spilling his beer onto the people
in front of him while ranting about how dirty the other team is.
Ted
Kennedy? John Kerry? Nancy Pelosi? I don't have a clue. Hillary
Clinton is currently the only figure in the party with the substance
and smarts to be competitive, but at the moment she seems to be
reading from a different playbook than a lot of other players
on the team.
Now,
I fully admit this post falls in the category of "not very
serious", but I've been sick for nearly a week and frankly
I'm not in the mood. But I do think this silliness is illustrative
of a larger, relevant point: right now the Democrats simply do
not have anyone with enough stature and charisma to compete on
the national level with this President. Last night was just one
more example of that fact.
To
go back to the analogy one last time, the Democrats are a team
without a coach and without any star players. Meanwhile, on the
other side, George W. Bush just keeps moving the ball down the
field and scoring touchdowns. - T. Bevan 11:35 am Link
| Email | Send
to a Friend
Monday,
January 31 2005
THE PURPLE REVOLUTION: 
The images from yesterday's election in Iraq are proof that pictures
really are worth a thousand words - and in some cases much more
than that.
In
fact, at times words seemed wholly inadequate to describe the
scope of what we witnessed yesterday. The courage, determination,
anxiety, and hope exhibited by the Iraqi people was so powerful
it moved all but the most hardened, Bush-hating hearts.
Even
Gail Collins & Co. at the New York Times
were brought to their editorial knees over yesterday's vote
- albeit somewhat grudgingly:
This
page has not hesitated to criticize the Bush administration
over its policies in Iraq, and we continue to have grave doubts
about the overall direction of American strategy there. Yet
today, along with other Americans, whether supporters or critics
of the war, we rejoice in a heartening advance by the Iraqi
people. For now at least, the multiple political failures that
marked the run-up to the voting stand eclipsed by a remarkably
successful election day.
The
Washington Post was even more bold:
For
the emerging democratic regime to have any chance of taking
root, U.S. soldiers will have to continue fighting, and dying,
to protect it. The elections probably won't make their job any
easier, or the price any lower, in the short term. Yesterday,
however, Americans finally got a good look at who they are fighting
for: millions of average people who have suffered for years
under dictatorship and who now desperately want to live in a
free and peaceful country. Their votes were an act of courage
and faith -- and an answer to the question of whether the mission
in Iraq remains a just cause.
Did
yesterday's election provide vindication for President Bush' Iraq
policy? We can't know how things will progress in the months and
years ahead, but certainly in the very short-term the answer has
to be "yes."
One
thing the vote in Iraq demonstrated in a very striking and palpable
way is the power of the franchise. The election in Iraq confirmed
Bush's belief that people around the world will, when given a
chance, embrace the principle of democracy and self-governance.
That, in turn, lends support to Bush's larger vision that the
spread of democracy around the world - but especially in a place
like the Arab Middle East - is vital to U.S. national security
interests.
Only
time will tell if January 30, 2005 will go down as one of the
most important dates in modern history. I happen to believe it
will. But between now and when the history books are written it
was enough, at least for me, to stand by on a Sunday and marvel
at the courage of people half a world away. - T. Bevan
9:35 am Link |
Email | Send
to a Friend
