Latex lizzie
Well-Known Member
talk about prescience!
from http://www.petehamill.com/bushpresidency.html
Pete Hamill on the Bush Presidency
Published in Letras Libres
January 2001
The coming presidency of George W. Bush should fill intelligent people with fear and trembling. It was one thing to have presidents stained with illegitimacy in the 19th century; it is quite another to have an illegitimate president in full possession of the mightiest military machine in the history of the world. Rutherford B. Hayes, a mediocrity who lost the popular vote and became president in 1888, did not have the hydrogen bomb.
The bizarre circumstances that brought Bush to the White House will be examined by historians for many years. But we should all be worried right now, in present time. Here is the basic problem: Bush will try to be president in circumstances that make almost all domestic movement impossible. The Congress is split almost exactly in half. The Republicans – the only true ideologues in the 21st century United States – will be frustrated in their attempts to impose fundamentalist Christian beliefs on a multi-ethnic, multi-religious nation. The Democrats – who still believe in the ability of a nation to repair its social inequities -- will be unable to move any of their own mildly liberal agenda . The imams of the Republican Party from the South and Midwest will continue to see the presence of the Great Satan among the Democrats. And many Democrats will continue to be unforgiving for the vicious Republican impeachment of Bill Clinton. The result: impasse.
Bush will then be tempted to do what most American presidents do when they can’t make anything happen at home. He will look beyond the borders of the United States. That is, he will try to find some small nation to beat up, wrap the assault in flowery idealistic language, and thus try to look presidential. He will talk about sacrifice and honor, and the brave American fighting man. He will try to force unity upon the fractious Congress. He will cite his rise in public opinion polls as proof of his wisdom and his “courage”. In that spirit, John F. Kennedy – who won his 1960 election by a mere 100,000 popular votes – allowed the Bay of Pigs operation to go forward, and sent the first substantial numbers of troops into Vietnam. Ronald Reagan was content to beat up Grenada while creating and funding (illegally) the Contra War in Nicaragua. Bush the Father went after Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War and killed 2000 human beings in Panama to arrest Manuel Noriega in the bloodiest drug bust in world history.
It’s unlikely that George W. Bush will be more prudent than his predecessors. Many Americans, led by cartoonists and comedians, believe that Bush – in spite of degrees from Yale and Harvard – is a bit of a dunce. During the campaign, his advisers wisely kept him away from reporters who might ask tough questions; they packaged him shrewdly, preventing all possibilities of spontaneity. In the 36 uncertain days after the election, he looked more uncertain than ever, while Daddy’s Boys (James Baker, Dick Cheney and others) showed up to handle the tough battle over Florida. In fact, George W. looked eerily like an American Dauphin, a forlorn rich kid in over his head, eyes blinking anxiously in his few public appearances like a POW in the Hanoi Hilton sending secret messages in Morse code. The basic message seemed to be: “How do I get out of this?”
In a sensible nation, Bush would be forced to create a coalition government, dumping Cheney (who has had four heart attacks) for a Democrat, forming a cabinet with Democrats in some of the most important jobs. Again, this is unlikely. The Republican ideologues would abandon him; the Democrats want him to fail.
So we should be prepared for armed melodrama. Bush is not a worldly man. His father was head of the CIA, ambassador to China, and president of the United States. The son stayed home. During the Vietnam War, he hurried into the Texas National Guard, defending the skies over Houston. He has visited only two foreign countries, one of them Mexico (the other seems to have slipped his mind). He was the first presidential candidate in memory who needed briefings about geography.
But he knows where Iraq is, and is completely aware of what his father failed to do in that country: remove Saddam Hussein. A son in rivalry with a father can be a very dangerous man. To show "leadership", the new President Bush might defy the European allies of the United States, and risk another oil crisis, by seizing on some slight -–real or imagined – to finish off Saddam Hussein. He would thus force his father to admire him and get a boost in the public opinion polls.
Bush could also let his eyes drift to our own hemisphere. He is the tenth president to deal with Fidel Castro (an incredible fact in itself). Under pressure from the Cuban exiles of Miami, who helped him “win” Florida, he might be tempted to step up the pressure, fund an internal revolt (in the style of the Contra War), and then step in militarily to support the “forces of freedom”. But Cuba is not the only possibility. Much more dangerous is Colombia. Bush would be able to tell his domestic audience that the alliance of the FARC and the narcotraficantes “will not stand.” He would blame Colombian Marxists – the perfect opponents -- for the drug problem in the United States, rather than those millions of American who insist on paying money to get stupefied on cocaine. (It is widely believed that among those millions of cocaine users was the young George W. Bush). Instead of initiating a vast drug rehabilitation program in the U.S., he could expand the war in Colombia. He would be told my his advisers that such a war would unite his fractured country; drug rehabilitation would end up on page 17 of the newspaper.
Alas, an expanded war in Colombia would almost certainly lead to an Andean War, with guerrillas rising everywhere, driven by nationalism rather than Marxism. As should have been learned from Vietnam, nothing unites a people more effectively than the presence of foreign soldiers. An Andean War could be a calamity for everyone in the region. American troops would be back in Panama to “protect the Canal”, and to deny refuge to guerrilla cadres (and the narco-bankers). Peru is already shaky; the military could be tempted to get rid of democracy “because of the emergency”. Every nation in the hemisphere, starting with Mexico, would be pressured to take sides.
I hope none of that happens. I hope Bush resists all such temptations. But in 2002 the United States will have Congressional elections. The Democratic Party, bitter over the presidential election, will turn out every possible vote in order to seize control of Congress. The Dauphin will be under intense pressure from his advisers to do something dramatic. We should all be prepared for the sight of corpses.
from http://www.petehamill.com/bushpresidency.html
Pete Hamill on the Bush Presidency
Published in Letras Libres
January 2001
The coming presidency of George W. Bush should fill intelligent people with fear and trembling. It was one thing to have presidents stained with illegitimacy in the 19th century; it is quite another to have an illegitimate president in full possession of the mightiest military machine in the history of the world. Rutherford B. Hayes, a mediocrity who lost the popular vote and became president in 1888, did not have the hydrogen bomb.
The bizarre circumstances that brought Bush to the White House will be examined by historians for many years. But we should all be worried right now, in present time. Here is the basic problem: Bush will try to be president in circumstances that make almost all domestic movement impossible. The Congress is split almost exactly in half. The Republicans – the only true ideologues in the 21st century United States – will be frustrated in their attempts to impose fundamentalist Christian beliefs on a multi-ethnic, multi-religious nation. The Democrats – who still believe in the ability of a nation to repair its social inequities -- will be unable to move any of their own mildly liberal agenda . The imams of the Republican Party from the South and Midwest will continue to see the presence of the Great Satan among the Democrats. And many Democrats will continue to be unforgiving for the vicious Republican impeachment of Bill Clinton. The result: impasse.
Bush will then be tempted to do what most American presidents do when they can’t make anything happen at home. He will look beyond the borders of the United States. That is, he will try to find some small nation to beat up, wrap the assault in flowery idealistic language, and thus try to look presidential. He will talk about sacrifice and honor, and the brave American fighting man. He will try to force unity upon the fractious Congress. He will cite his rise in public opinion polls as proof of his wisdom and his “courage”. In that spirit, John F. Kennedy – who won his 1960 election by a mere 100,000 popular votes – allowed the Bay of Pigs operation to go forward, and sent the first substantial numbers of troops into Vietnam. Ronald Reagan was content to beat up Grenada while creating and funding (illegally) the Contra War in Nicaragua. Bush the Father went after Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War and killed 2000 human beings in Panama to arrest Manuel Noriega in the bloodiest drug bust in world history.
It’s unlikely that George W. Bush will be more prudent than his predecessors. Many Americans, led by cartoonists and comedians, believe that Bush – in spite of degrees from Yale and Harvard – is a bit of a dunce. During the campaign, his advisers wisely kept him away from reporters who might ask tough questions; they packaged him shrewdly, preventing all possibilities of spontaneity. In the 36 uncertain days after the election, he looked more uncertain than ever, while Daddy’s Boys (James Baker, Dick Cheney and others) showed up to handle the tough battle over Florida. In fact, George W. looked eerily like an American Dauphin, a forlorn rich kid in over his head, eyes blinking anxiously in his few public appearances like a POW in the Hanoi Hilton sending secret messages in Morse code. The basic message seemed to be: “How do I get out of this?”
In a sensible nation, Bush would be forced to create a coalition government, dumping Cheney (who has had four heart attacks) for a Democrat, forming a cabinet with Democrats in some of the most important jobs. Again, this is unlikely. The Republican ideologues would abandon him; the Democrats want him to fail.
So we should be prepared for armed melodrama. Bush is not a worldly man. His father was head of the CIA, ambassador to China, and president of the United States. The son stayed home. During the Vietnam War, he hurried into the Texas National Guard, defending the skies over Houston. He has visited only two foreign countries, one of them Mexico (the other seems to have slipped his mind). He was the first presidential candidate in memory who needed briefings about geography.
But he knows where Iraq is, and is completely aware of what his father failed to do in that country: remove Saddam Hussein. A son in rivalry with a father can be a very dangerous man. To show "leadership", the new President Bush might defy the European allies of the United States, and risk another oil crisis, by seizing on some slight -–real or imagined – to finish off Saddam Hussein. He would thus force his father to admire him and get a boost in the public opinion polls.
Bush could also let his eyes drift to our own hemisphere. He is the tenth president to deal with Fidel Castro (an incredible fact in itself). Under pressure from the Cuban exiles of Miami, who helped him “win” Florida, he might be tempted to step up the pressure, fund an internal revolt (in the style of the Contra War), and then step in militarily to support the “forces of freedom”. But Cuba is not the only possibility. Much more dangerous is Colombia. Bush would be able to tell his domestic audience that the alliance of the FARC and the narcotraficantes “will not stand.” He would blame Colombian Marxists – the perfect opponents -- for the drug problem in the United States, rather than those millions of American who insist on paying money to get stupefied on cocaine. (It is widely believed that among those millions of cocaine users was the young George W. Bush). Instead of initiating a vast drug rehabilitation program in the U.S., he could expand the war in Colombia. He would be told my his advisers that such a war would unite his fractured country; drug rehabilitation would end up on page 17 of the newspaper.
Alas, an expanded war in Colombia would almost certainly lead to an Andean War, with guerrillas rising everywhere, driven by nationalism rather than Marxism. As should have been learned from Vietnam, nothing unites a people more effectively than the presence of foreign soldiers. An Andean War could be a calamity for everyone in the region. American troops would be back in Panama to “protect the Canal”, and to deny refuge to guerrilla cadres (and the narco-bankers). Peru is already shaky; the military could be tempted to get rid of democracy “because of the emergency”. Every nation in the hemisphere, starting with Mexico, would be pressured to take sides.
I hope none of that happens. I hope Bush resists all such temptations. But in 2002 the United States will have Congressional elections. The Democratic Party, bitter over the presidential election, will turn out every possible vote in order to seize control of Congress. The Dauphin will be under intense pressure from his advisers to do something dramatic. We should all be prepared for the sight of corpses.
