Posted by
RME KRNL on Sunday, November 23, 2008 12:54:01 PM
I've often read articles by Georgie Anne Geyer and, while sometimes not totally agreeing with her point of view, I have enjoyed them.
But, not so much with her "Time to bask in hope" article, Washington Times Commentary Section, Sunday, November 9, 2008, page B4. (If you want to read her whole article, go to Washingtontimes.com and search its archives by author or date.) Some things she wrote in this article just beg for redress.
It is perfectly all right with me that her article was a little gushy about Obama winning the election. Ms. Geyer can gush if she wants to. But, as a journalist, she is supposed to also be somewhat objective. Well, not so much, at least not in this article.
Ms. Geyer: "...there he was, the first black president of the United States! And if you've lived in the years leading up to this, it all rather takes your breath away."
Well, Ms. Geyer, I have lived in all "the years leading up to this." My first presidential vote was for John Kennedy in 1960, and I served our country myself for almost 26 years in the military. But, no, Obama being elected did not take my breath away. Rather, it made me worry that the American Electorate, seemingly swayed by a near cult of personality, had elected a man, regardless of his skin color, who was not properly vetted by the liberal mainstream media, whose actual experience was less than any of the other three presidential and vice presidential candidates, and whose record, slim though it may be, showed him to be a far left liberal.
Ms. Geyer again: "It will be fascinating to watch what his presidency will stand for -- and inspire -- in the rest of the world. Americans have never understood the degree to which we are a unique nation in the world, in that we at least try to accept 'the other' among us."
It strikes me as singularly oxymoronic that Ms. Geyer would juxtapose these two sentences -- one about what Obama's presidency will stand for to the rest of the world and the other alluding to America's exceptionalism. So far, what Obama and his pending presidency seem to stand for, at least to the Europeans, is that he is one of them, a socialist. And they, our European friends and foes alike, like that. They like it because it means America will become more like their socialistic countries and share their socialistic views of their own countries and the world. And that is antithetical to the very ideals of American exceptionalism, which are that Americans are more individualistic, self-reliant, anti-state and pro-immigration than people in most other countries; they work harder, are more philanthropic and participate more in civic activities -- all of which are anti-socialist traits.
I also disagree with Ms. Geyer's flat statement that "Americans have never understood the degree to which we are a unique nation in the world..." Well, maybe not among the crowd you hang out with, Ms. Geyer, but many Americans always have and still do believe strongly in America's exceptionalism, its being different from any other nation, its being that "city on the hill," that "democratic beacon of hope" to the world. The average American may not be able to pedantically articulate what comprises American exceptionalism, but many Americans know, almost instinctively, what it is and what makes us different, what should rightfully make us proud of who we are and what we do. Of course, most of those who do know are over 30, because it's been about that long since liberalism took over our classrooms and stopped teaching such things as Civics and American History, while increasingly excluding the Judeo-Christian principles upon which our nation was founded and to which it mainly adhered until about the last generation or so.
Ms. Geyer yet again: "The outgoing Bush family should be ashamed, if they had the decency to be so, to leave our nation as it is to someone else to try to put in order: Two senseless wars still going on. Our financial structure in collapse, and the entire world endangered."
Well, Georgie Anne, I hardly know where to begin, so let me just ask you some questions. Do you not understand there is something called a Constitutional Amendment that requires President Bush to leave office now, after two terms as president, no matter what else is going on? You make it sound like he's skipping out the back door and purposefully leaving a mess for the next guy.
Actually, that's what Clinton staffers did as George W. came into office, destroying government property by removing the W on computer keyboards, gluing desk drawers shut, trashing official files, etc., etc., which the mainstream media seemed to think was "cute" and "playful" but for which I, as a military officer, would have been prosecuted or sometimes, as a commander, had to prosecute others for. Heck, in the military, we were subject to sanction for even the misuse of government property, much less its willful destruction. Did any of those Clinton staffers ever pay one dime of restitution to the American taxpayers for their "playful," albeit illegal, behavior? Never mind. That's a rhetorical question.
Instead, President Bush has mounted one of the most comprehensive transition mechanisms in history to help President-elect Obama hit the ground running. No mention of that, though, huh? And no mention either that President Bush has kept us safe from another terrorist attack on our own soil for over seven years? Hmmm, okay, let's see how Obama does with that.
As to "Two senseless wars still going on," of course you mean (a) the one in Iraq, which Obama opposes, has been wrong about, has been wrong about the surge for, and though he only recently reluctantly admitted the surge had turned around, still believes we should never have gotten into and we should pull out of before finishing the job, and also (b) the one in Afghanistan, which Obama actually favors and says we should be doing more about. Those "two senseless wars"? What do you think is one thing that has kept al-Qaeda so busy as to perhaps not have time to strike us again at home if it has not been our intervention in Iraq, which al-Qaeda itself then declared as the main front on which to defeat us and sent thousands of terrorists to, so we could kill and capture them, rather than have them planning another attack on us here at home?
And, as to "Our financial structure in collapse, and the entire world endangered," you might want to look a little more into the Congressional Democrats who repeatedly refused President Bush's 17 calls, starting in 2001, to tighten controls on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but who instead persisted in their social engineering experiment to give the American Dream to unqualified mortgagees, instead of requiring them to be qualified to earn it. The F&F collapse was the precursor to all the financial house of cards falling and that is what's led to damaging our entire "financial structure."
And, yes, the entire world is endangered, but by Islamic terrorists, not by the outgoing, should be ashamed and indecent Bushes. It will be interesting to see how the oh-so-charismatic and inspiring Obama handles the terrorist threat. Running an inspiring campaign is one thing; governing when you can't just vote "present" is another. I wish our new president well, for all our sakes, but I'm watching to see what he does, not just what he says. After all, talk is cheap.
So, Georgie Anne, it's okay to gush about Obama if you like, but it's not okay to take cheap shots at the outgoing president in the process. And that ending sentence of yours about one wishing "one could snatch a touch of his magic and burrow it away for the hard times," well, as I said, I truly hope President-elect Obama does well, but just in case he doesn't, you might want to really cling to that "touch of his magic" -- you know, "for the hard times."
Note: For more on American exceptionalism, see Understanding America: The Anatomy of an Exceptional Nation (PublicAffairs, 2008), a collection of essays edited by Peter H. Schuck and James Q. Wilson, designed to probe the Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville’s 1831 observation in his Democracy in America that America is “exceptional,” or qualitatively different from other countries.
Understanding America examines 19 different areas and marshals the best and most current social science evidence about America’s unique institutions, culture and public policies. It describes the ways -- both good and bad -- in which Americans differ from people in other nations and also considers whether American exceptionalism is likely to continue, and how it matters to the world.
Some highlights:
-One of the best ways to understand American exceptionalism is to look at polls. Three-quarters of Americans say they are proud to be Americans; only one-third of the people in France, Italy, Germany and Japan give that response about their own countries. Two-thirds of Americans believe that success in life depends on one’s own efforts; only one-third of Europeans say that. Half of Americans, compared to one-third of Europeans, say belief in God is essential to living a moral life.
-Wilson makes the point that criticism of America has a long history, particularly among elites. Sigmund Freud said, “America is a great mistake.” "Anti-Americanism has long been an elite view,” Wilson continued, “but it has (more recently) spread deeper to publics here and abroad.”
-Schuck said that Understanding America casts a new light on American exceptionalism by examining it at a micro level. He identified seven overarching themes that connect the essays.
(1) American culture is different. Its patriotism, individualism, religiosity and spirit of enterprise make it different. The United States, Schuck said, “is more different from other democracies than they are from one another.”
(2) American constitutionalism is unique in its emphasis on individual rights, decentralization and suspicion of government authority.
(3) Our uniquely competitive, flexible and decentralized economy has produced a high standard of living for a long time, even though it now generates greater inequality.
(4) America has been diverse throughout its history. Schuck cited research by historian Jill Lepore, who found that the percentage of non-native English speakers in the United States was actually greater in 1790 than it was in 1990. The thirst for immigration, he said, has transcended economic booms and busts.
(5) The strengths of civil society here make America qualitatively different. No other country, Schuck said, allocates as much responsibility for social policy to the nonprofit sector.
(6) The characterization of the United States as a welfare-state laggard compared to Europe misses (or dismisses) an element of American distinctiveness -- its reliance on private entities to provide certain benefits instead of the state.
(7) We are exceptional demographically with our relatively high fertility rate compared with other nations around the world.