Dangerous work ahead
May 4, 2003 | 12:00am
Im all for prayer. "More things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of." Thats true. Im glad that our government leaders and officials prayed to God to save our people from the "great plague" of SARS at their summit the other day. But God, too, helps those who help themselves.
The President must guard herself against her deplorable tendency to try to please everybody. She cant go around saying that the SARS threat isnt as bad as we think, then put on her other "mood" and declare that we must be alert and fight SARS. Now, which is which?
I just read a book called Bushs Brain. (Yeh, yeh: A number of people will, in reflexive chorus, exclaim in indignation: "What? Bush has a brain?")
The truth is that this new opus (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey simultaneously published in Canada, 2003) is a sly jab at the US President by Emmy Award-winning TV news correspondent James Moore (credits CNN, NBC and CBS) and Wayne Slater, bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News.
The books subhead gives the game away. It goes: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential.
In short, the authors imply that this fella, Rove, is really the man behind Bush, exerting "his influence in virtually every presidential decision whether it involves steel import tariffs or extending the war on terrorism".
Is Rove, whos never on the front pages, the grise eminence, the Rasputin, behind Mr. Bush? His "brain"? The writers say Rove destroyed the careers of people who opposed his ideas and his candidates, "ran brutal yet brilliant campaign that eventually swept Bush into the White House", and planned "secret classes" to teach Bush how government works.
Yet, for all the barbs and unflattering anecdotes, Dubya Bush comes out despite the authors critical intent strangely sympathetic and honest.
When Rove decided to support Bush, then still a face in the crowd, for Texas Governor in 1993 against the popular lady Governor Ann Richards, a Democrat, he recognized that Bush was "not only a country-club Republican lower taxes, less regulation but also a social conservative in a way his father was not. Bush disliked the openness and lassitude of the 1960s.
Rove set about preparing Bush for the campaign, organized the "early tutoring sessions", assembling the "issue-development teams", producing "the golden money lists" in October 1993.
"But when the campaign senior staff gathered," Moore and Slater recounted, "Bush wanted it known that he not Rove framed the agenda of his campaign."
Heres the significant quote: "When youre developing things," Bush said one day, looking around the table, Im going to tell you what I believe. You guys are the wordsmiths. You can smith it out. But its going to start with what I think."
"There was a curious dance between the candidate and the consultant in which Rove clearly sought to steer Bush in a particular direction and Bush periodically would jerk the reins and reassert his authority." (page 203-4)
On page 293 is a line which states: "Bush has been saying since he first ran for governor of Texas that he doesnt need polls to tell him what to think."
I believe that our President Macapagal-Arroyo ought to peer closer at him and observe these traits in her phone-pal George W. Bush. His two book-author critics, in the honesty of their own reporting, ended up being forced to concede the grit of leadership that helped Dubya in taking hard decisions even when he clearly saw these were unpopular, both at home, and, even more so, abroad.
GMA could also learn from the way Bush resisted Roves impositions and importunings. GMA has always been too wishy-washy in coping with her supposed advisers and consultants, too frequently allowing herself to be jerked around by their self-serving agendas.
In Texas, they say that a man must have "sand in his craw". Over there (and this thought is my own) the women are expected to be even tougher.
One of the cellphone texts which went around a few weeks ago was a vulgar stab at Bush which cleverly went: "Wasnt the world better off when all the American President wanted was a blow-job, instead of blowing up the world?"
That text which flew from one cellphone to another must either have emanated from a peacenik, a Muslim, a Leftist, a Democrat or a nut not necessarily in that order of importance.
However, the reference to former US President Bill Clinton brings up another point. Clinton, who was mercilessly attacked and humiliated for his serial sexcapades, was, in Jekyll & Hyde fashion, a forceful and decisive President and, like the hardline Republican Ronald Reagan (his very political opposite) a "Great Communicator".
I bring this up because I cant let pass, before I put the book about Bushs Brain aside, the graceful tribute the two authors paid Clinton and which he richly deserves.
They referred to Bushs current troubles, the economy, the war in Iraq, "North Koreas admission to having nuclear weapons", the complaints by some opinion leaders "about a lack of progress in the war on terrorism", etc.
"In these settings," the writers declared, "President Bill Clinton was always at his best. Other speakers might have approximated his language. But his presentation was without equal. As Clinton walked into the Roosevelt Room of the White House, everyone in attendance knew, emotionally, what was about to transpire. The President, almost certainly, was going to take them to the edge of tears, fill them with regret and American pride, then conclude with suggestions of hope and redemption by righting a great wrong."
And, perhaps, this is what so many of our so-called leaders so grievously lack, starting from the top: The inability to stir up hope and call to action, to appeal to Filipino pride, to engage our people in fighting for whats important, or righting a great wrong. What we see is our unfortunate nation, induced to laziness by too many holidays, stripped of pride by witnessing the petty squabbles among those who should be giving them both good example and inspiration. By their own selfishness, our supposed leadership reinforces the culture of selfishness which manifests itself in the way we drive, our messed-up traffic, the growing climate of anarchy, the combatting of crime only by press releases (kidnappings and akyat-bahay robberies are on the rise, not in the decline), and a self-defeating arrogance among rich and poor alike.
Its time for a reality check.
That was a good photograph on yesterdays page one, of Bush togged out in fighter pilots gear flashing the "victory" sign. But Dubya didnt really declare final victory. He said that the US and its allies had "prevailed", and that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended". He warned that "difficult work" lies ahead.
Not just difficult, George, but dangerous.
Even as he spoke, there was a grenade attack in the fanatically-Muslim town of Fellujah which wounded seven American soldiers. (Fellujah is just 30 miles west of Baghdad). The two hand grenades tossed into the US compound there appeared to be in revenge for shooting incidents last Monday and Wednesday in which 15 anti-American demonstrators were killed by US troops. The angry families and friends of the slain demonstrators claimed they had been unarmed; the Americans insisted they had fired back because they were fired upon. The scenes of raging demonstrators and protesters carrying the coffins of the "victims" brought a strong feeling of déjà vu to those who have witnessed Palestinian funerals and anti-Israeli demonstrations over the years since the two intifadahs began.
The Americans will have to brace themselves for more of the same to come. And, if you ask me, they must be prepared to shoot, not be disarmed or disheartened by screams from the crowd, or worldwide criticism. What did they expect when they went to war? The Muslims will never forgive them. Forgive them for what? For "supporting" Israel. For "humiliating" the Arabs, even while they "liberated" Iraq from Saddam. For being a superpower. For being Christian. For being too "Jewish", influenced by a powerful Jewish lobby. For producing pizzas and hamburgers. You name it: On the Arab Street, America is hated. They better believe it. (Youll notice that the US is even beginning to move aircraft and airbase personnel out of Saudi Arabia, and over to Qatar there theyre not really loved much more, but where at least the sheikhs are pragmatic in Doha.)
And why shouldnt they remember that the Fedayeen are still out there in Fellujah, in Baghdad, in Mosul, and elsewhere in Iraq? The guerrilla war, as predicted from the start, is in progress. After all, the entire country is virtually an ammunition and weapons dump. In the northern city of Mosul (where there have been armed clashes between Americans and looters or demonstrators) 153 arms caches have been discovered. In Baghdad, at least 150 have been identified (including the one which blew up in a civilian neighborhood and for which, as usual, the residents furiously blamed the Americans). The poor Yanks are besieged from all sides by ingratitude and dislike.
The Iraqis want them to leave. The Iraqis also want the Americans to provide them with electricity, water, food, jobs, and security. Is Iraq beyond salvation?
The real question is: Is Iraq "governable"? Sus, its beginning to look like Mindanao.
Yet, the Americans have no choice. They must stay the course. Their worst mistake would be to yield to the shouts of the mob, give up, pack up and go home. Leave Iraq to the Ayatollahs, the Imams, the Muslim clerics, and the radicals? Its a tough job you undertake when you try to save a people who distrust you as a "savior". But its too late to turn back.
As for us, how come we havent sent those 500 Filipino humanitarian aid workers, doctors, nurses, soldiers and policemen yet? Are we still out on a "holiday"? Is GMA scared of the swaggering critics in the Senate and House, and among the rabble?
Lets see some action sanamagan. Go send feckless "Triple R" (as they call him in the DFA), the Desert Sheikh of Sikatuna, whom the President has handpicked to lead our foray into Iraq: Roberto R. Romulo, to Baghdad yeh, even to Fellujah as our "advance team".
But a warning: Theres no air-conditioning out there.
The President must guard herself against her deplorable tendency to try to please everybody. She cant go around saying that the SARS threat isnt as bad as we think, then put on her other "mood" and declare that we must be alert and fight SARS. Now, which is which?
I just read a book called Bushs Brain. (Yeh, yeh: A number of people will, in reflexive chorus, exclaim in indignation: "What? Bush has a brain?")
The truth is that this new opus (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey simultaneously published in Canada, 2003) is a sly jab at the US President by Emmy Award-winning TV news correspondent James Moore (credits CNN, NBC and CBS) and Wayne Slater, bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News.
The books subhead gives the game away. It goes: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential.
In short, the authors imply that this fella, Rove, is really the man behind Bush, exerting "his influence in virtually every presidential decision whether it involves steel import tariffs or extending the war on terrorism".
Is Rove, whos never on the front pages, the grise eminence, the Rasputin, behind Mr. Bush? His "brain"? The writers say Rove destroyed the careers of people who opposed his ideas and his candidates, "ran brutal yet brilliant campaign that eventually swept Bush into the White House", and planned "secret classes" to teach Bush how government works.
Yet, for all the barbs and unflattering anecdotes, Dubya Bush comes out despite the authors critical intent strangely sympathetic and honest.
When Rove decided to support Bush, then still a face in the crowd, for Texas Governor in 1993 against the popular lady Governor Ann Richards, a Democrat, he recognized that Bush was "not only a country-club Republican lower taxes, less regulation but also a social conservative in a way his father was not. Bush disliked the openness and lassitude of the 1960s.
Rove set about preparing Bush for the campaign, organized the "early tutoring sessions", assembling the "issue-development teams", producing "the golden money lists" in October 1993.
"But when the campaign senior staff gathered," Moore and Slater recounted, "Bush wanted it known that he not Rove framed the agenda of his campaign."
Heres the significant quote: "When youre developing things," Bush said one day, looking around the table, Im going to tell you what I believe. You guys are the wordsmiths. You can smith it out. But its going to start with what I think."
"There was a curious dance between the candidate and the consultant in which Rove clearly sought to steer Bush in a particular direction and Bush periodically would jerk the reins and reassert his authority." (page 203-4)
On page 293 is a line which states: "Bush has been saying since he first ran for governor of Texas that he doesnt need polls to tell him what to think."
I believe that our President Macapagal-Arroyo ought to peer closer at him and observe these traits in her phone-pal George W. Bush. His two book-author critics, in the honesty of their own reporting, ended up being forced to concede the grit of leadership that helped Dubya in taking hard decisions even when he clearly saw these were unpopular, both at home, and, even more so, abroad.
GMA could also learn from the way Bush resisted Roves impositions and importunings. GMA has always been too wishy-washy in coping with her supposed advisers and consultants, too frequently allowing herself to be jerked around by their self-serving agendas.
In Texas, they say that a man must have "sand in his craw". Over there (and this thought is my own) the women are expected to be even tougher.
That text which flew from one cellphone to another must either have emanated from a peacenik, a Muslim, a Leftist, a Democrat or a nut not necessarily in that order of importance.
However, the reference to former US President Bill Clinton brings up another point. Clinton, who was mercilessly attacked and humiliated for his serial sexcapades, was, in Jekyll & Hyde fashion, a forceful and decisive President and, like the hardline Republican Ronald Reagan (his very political opposite) a "Great Communicator".
I bring this up because I cant let pass, before I put the book about Bushs Brain aside, the graceful tribute the two authors paid Clinton and which he richly deserves.
They referred to Bushs current troubles, the economy, the war in Iraq, "North Koreas admission to having nuclear weapons", the complaints by some opinion leaders "about a lack of progress in the war on terrorism", etc.
"In these settings," the writers declared, "President Bill Clinton was always at his best. Other speakers might have approximated his language. But his presentation was without equal. As Clinton walked into the Roosevelt Room of the White House, everyone in attendance knew, emotionally, what was about to transpire. The President, almost certainly, was going to take them to the edge of tears, fill them with regret and American pride, then conclude with suggestions of hope and redemption by righting a great wrong."
And, perhaps, this is what so many of our so-called leaders so grievously lack, starting from the top: The inability to stir up hope and call to action, to appeal to Filipino pride, to engage our people in fighting for whats important, or righting a great wrong. What we see is our unfortunate nation, induced to laziness by too many holidays, stripped of pride by witnessing the petty squabbles among those who should be giving them both good example and inspiration. By their own selfishness, our supposed leadership reinforces the culture of selfishness which manifests itself in the way we drive, our messed-up traffic, the growing climate of anarchy, the combatting of crime only by press releases (kidnappings and akyat-bahay robberies are on the rise, not in the decline), and a self-defeating arrogance among rich and poor alike.
Its time for a reality check.
Not just difficult, George, but dangerous.
Even as he spoke, there was a grenade attack in the fanatically-Muslim town of Fellujah which wounded seven American soldiers. (Fellujah is just 30 miles west of Baghdad). The two hand grenades tossed into the US compound there appeared to be in revenge for shooting incidents last Monday and Wednesday in which 15 anti-American demonstrators were killed by US troops. The angry families and friends of the slain demonstrators claimed they had been unarmed; the Americans insisted they had fired back because they were fired upon. The scenes of raging demonstrators and protesters carrying the coffins of the "victims" brought a strong feeling of déjà vu to those who have witnessed Palestinian funerals and anti-Israeli demonstrations over the years since the two intifadahs began.
The Americans will have to brace themselves for more of the same to come. And, if you ask me, they must be prepared to shoot, not be disarmed or disheartened by screams from the crowd, or worldwide criticism. What did they expect when they went to war? The Muslims will never forgive them. Forgive them for what? For "supporting" Israel. For "humiliating" the Arabs, even while they "liberated" Iraq from Saddam. For being a superpower. For being Christian. For being too "Jewish", influenced by a powerful Jewish lobby. For producing pizzas and hamburgers. You name it: On the Arab Street, America is hated. They better believe it. (Youll notice that the US is even beginning to move aircraft and airbase personnel out of Saudi Arabia, and over to Qatar there theyre not really loved much more, but where at least the sheikhs are pragmatic in Doha.)
And why shouldnt they remember that the Fedayeen are still out there in Fellujah, in Baghdad, in Mosul, and elsewhere in Iraq? The guerrilla war, as predicted from the start, is in progress. After all, the entire country is virtually an ammunition and weapons dump. In the northern city of Mosul (where there have been armed clashes between Americans and looters or demonstrators) 153 arms caches have been discovered. In Baghdad, at least 150 have been identified (including the one which blew up in a civilian neighborhood and for which, as usual, the residents furiously blamed the Americans). The poor Yanks are besieged from all sides by ingratitude and dislike.
The Iraqis want them to leave. The Iraqis also want the Americans to provide them with electricity, water, food, jobs, and security. Is Iraq beyond salvation?
The real question is: Is Iraq "governable"? Sus, its beginning to look like Mindanao.
Yet, the Americans have no choice. They must stay the course. Their worst mistake would be to yield to the shouts of the mob, give up, pack up and go home. Leave Iraq to the Ayatollahs, the Imams, the Muslim clerics, and the radicals? Its a tough job you undertake when you try to save a people who distrust you as a "savior". But its too late to turn back.
As for us, how come we havent sent those 500 Filipino humanitarian aid workers, doctors, nurses, soldiers and policemen yet? Are we still out on a "holiday"? Is GMA scared of the swaggering critics in the Senate and House, and among the rabble?
Lets see some action sanamagan. Go send feckless "Triple R" (as they call him in the DFA), the Desert Sheikh of Sikatuna, whom the President has handpicked to lead our foray into Iraq: Roberto R. Romulo, to Baghdad yeh, even to Fellujah as our "advance team".
But a warning: Theres no air-conditioning out there.
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
- Latest
- Trending
Trending
Latest