But Rich has just one key point of comparison he wants to make: Once we see the Wizard is just Professor Marvel, he can never go back to being the Wizard, and, by the same token, once President Bush — pay no attention to that mayor and governor behind the curtain — has been exposed as a fraud, nothing he can do thereafter can ever make us think of him as anything but a fraud. But, of course, this isn't true. Marvel was never a Wizard, and once we know that, we can never fall for the fakery again. But Bush really is the President, and the Presidency isn't a fraud, despite all the many mistakes the human being who tries to fill the impossibly large role will make. And Bush has made an ambitious proposal for dealing with the problems left by Katrina:
The president will ask Congress to declare the entire Gulf Coast region one big enterprise zone, qualifying for subsidized loans and tax breaks for investment and hiring. And in addition to dispatching legions of its own workers to process the paperwork, oversee the massive rebuilding effort and ensure that the billions are well spent, the government will contract thousands of private-sector workers to help them out. An estimated $200 billion in federal spending could be augmented by $60 billion in insurance payments and tens of billions of investment by individuals and firms.Rich is dismissing all of this out of hand as just more of a pattern of indulgence in imagery and cronyism. But I get the feeling that Rich's op-ed is just more of his ongoing pattern of despising Bush, no matter what happens. Well, the little dog parted that curtain long ago. Let me turn my eyes slightly to the left — in the physical sense — and read David Brooks's column:
This is an effort to transform the gulf region, which had become a disaster zone of urban liberalism. All around the South, cities are booming, but New Orleans never did. All around the country, crime was dropping, but in New Orleans it was rising. Immigrants were flowing across the land in search of opportunity, but as Joel Kotkin has observed, few were interested in New Orleans.Is it foolish to want to be optimistic about this plan?
Now the Bush administration is trying to change all that. That means trying to get around the corruption that made the city such a rotten place to do business. The White House is trying to do this by devising programs in which checks and benefits flow directly to recipients, not through local agencies....
His administration is going to fight a two-front war, against big government liberals and small government conservatives, but if he can devote himself to executing his policies, the Gulf Coast will be his T.V.A., the program that serves as a model for what can be done nationwide.
UPDATE: Donna Brazile went for the optimism:
The president has set a national goal and defined a national purpose. This is something I believe with all my heart: When we are united, nothing can stop us. We will not waver, we will not tire, and we will not stop until the streets are clean, every last brick has been replaced and every last family has its home back....
New Orleans will rise again. My hometown is down but not out, and with the help of every American, it will be back on its feet, bigger and brighter than ever.
Mr. President, I am ready for duty. I am ready to stir those old pots again. Let's roll up our sleeves and get to work.
पोस्ट्स
१४ टिप्पण्या:
'The Wizard of Oz' was originally written as political satire. It rails against the perceived buffoonery of William Jennings Bryan and his demagogic advocacy of the gold standard as a panacea for the economic woes of, particularly, farm folks.
I used a famous line from the book and movie in the second part of my blog series on, 'The Place of Place in Faith and Life.'
To Rich's main point: Not only does he overlook the fact that Bush really is the President, he also overlooks the American penchant for forgiveness and redemption. While we can be momentarily savage in our judgments, to the point that people may fall from favor or power, we also love to forgive. There are second acts in America and in American politics. Martha Stewart has a new prime time series. Even Richard Nixon had attained the status of "elder statesman" before he died, which must have been about the fifth "new Nixon" in the public's long relationship with him.
My first instinct is to ask "why are you feeding the trolls"
When it comes to the Boooosh regime (since when have U.S. Administrations been called regimes anyway?) most of the Op-Eds from the NYT are either influenced by, or subsequently spawn the commentary from the left-leaning under-bridge crowd.
My second instinct is to mutter curses for having been induced into reading something written by that clueless malcontent (I'd say Mr. Rich should go back to theater reviews, but that would be far too unkind to the theatah).
And finally, to answer the question you pose, from the perspective of the NYT Op-Ed page, yes it is not only foolish but dangerous to be optimistic about anything in any field of endeavor that involves any aspect of the federal government so long as the Bu$hHitler regime controls the reins (and I wish I was exaggerating, but sadly I'm not)
Rich takes the Bush/Wizard of Oz comparison only as far as it suits him. At the end of the movie, Marvel was still well-liked and respected, and the people of Oz readily forgave him. Although the point could be debated, the final impression was that Marvel was recognized to be acting in good faith and doing the best he could in a tough situation. To be fair, he did admit he wasn't much of a wizard. I don't recall any Chimpy McMarvelHitler signs in the final Oz scenes.
One could make the case all presidents are the Wizard of Oz in the sense that their persona and mystique is always much larger than the reality behind the curtain. Anyway, the point is strained, Bush is not Marvel, and presidents are not wizards. The comparison was just a convenience for Rich to make his point.
Is it foolish to want to be optimistic about this plan?
No, not foolish to want to be optimistic, any more so than it was foolish to want to be optimistic about social security reform, conservative fiscal policy, etc.
It would certainly be foolish to actually be optimistic, though. Bush could have the cure for cancer and AIDS in one simple package, but the minority party, 'knowing' they simply couldn't politically afford to allow a GOP triumph over such a pressing issue, would throw roadblock after obstruction in the way of any meaningful implementation.
In other words, DC "business as usual" is our worst enemy, and will continue to be for the foreseeable future.
In the interest of fairness, I should note that you could replace "Bush" in my comment above with any president, of either party, and the result would be the same.
FRank Rich has been an embarrassment for a while now. Rich/Dowd/Krugman -- the triumvirate the bitter, the vapid, and the patently dishonest. I'd go with a tin man, scraecrow, cowardly lion theme, but I'm too tired to work it out -- and I like the lion, tin man, and scarecrow.
the NYT wants us to pay fo this crap in addition to all that add revenue? Not bloody likely.
Why do I have this funny sinking feeling that if the Republicans lose in 2008 (I really hope they won't), we'll see an outbreak of "____ derangement syndrome" among the new opposition?
Anyway, am much happier with the administration's response of late, though would much prefer, oh, a repeal of the highway bill to finance it...
Tiger: You can just as well look back and remember the crazy Clinton-hating. I was against Clinton hating and I have never liked seeing the Bush hating that came after it.
Uh, Mark, you might want to re-read the Cross of Gold speech: Bryan was hardly an advocate of the gold standard.
Bush hating vs. Clinton-hating...
The main difference Tiger is that the Demo heavyweights partake daily in the most deranged and idiotic Bush-bashing.
Dole, Gramm, Rudman, Bush (take your pick of which), Gingrich (even), et al. never or rarely partook of any of the Clinton has people whacked theories or sold drugs out of Mena airport in Ark. etc. TRhat kind of crap regularly spout out of the pie-holes of people who sit next to Presidents at conventions, get invited by the major party to fund-raisers and by Congresspeople and Senators. That is light years beyond any sort of whiney (and wrong) Clinton-bashing.
I never read anything that begins "um, Ann."
Yeesh. So for those who have missed the political dialogue since the hurricane (and how I envy those who have), here's a synopsis:
Tweedle-Dee: It's not as bad as 9/11.
Tweedle-Dumb: It is as bad as 9/11!
President Bush: "This is a natural disaster the likes of which our country has never seen before ... New Orleans is more devastated than New York was."
Tweedle-Dumb: See?
Tweedle-Dee: But the president isn't responsible for the aftermath.
Tweedle-Dumb: The president is responsible for the aftermath!
President Bush: "To the extent that the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility."
Tweedle-Dumb: See?
Tweedle-Dee: But the president's critics are paralyzed by Bush hatred!
Tweedle-Dumb-struck: [silence]
Commenters at Tweedle-Dee.blogspot: Yeah! FRank Rich has been an embarrassment for a while now! Dowd and Krugman are like snuff films!
As for the president still being the president, I suspect Frank Rich actually knows that. Professor Marvel could no longer pretend to be an actual wizard; what Rich is saying is that Bush can no longer pretend to be a good president, let alone the triumphant warrior keeping America safe from the hazards of a hostile world, courageously landing jets on aircraft carriers in his very own flight suit.
I was against the whole Clinton trial as well.
However, I can really feel any remaining non-partisanship draining out of me. I can understand the opposition to the iraw war etc... However, in my opinion, the democratic demagoguery over Katrina has done far more to damage reconciliation than Iraq.
The Hitchens/Galloway debate shows how Katrina is being used by the left in an all time low.
It's not over yet either. Every little mistake by some low level civil servant will be cited by the media and the left as a failure of the Bush administration. It will get nasty so nasty....
The Democrats are asking for masochism. And they will get it.
I agree with the commenter who says that it isn't foolish to want to be optimistic about this plan.
But I am concerned about federal dollars being used for rebuilding New Orleans, money that could probably be more profitably spent elsewhere. Help people rebuild their lives. Preserve the French Quarter. But I wonder about rebuilding New Orleans to its pre-Katrina state.
I'm further concerned about impact this program will have on the deficit.
It appears to me that the President is making the same mistake made by another Chief Executive from Texas, Lyndon Johnson: Acting as though the federal government has an endless supply of cash for guns and butter.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा