Бут

So. On Monday, President Bush will visit Mongolia (the post title is Mongolian for "bush" -- you pronounce it "bawt", like bawt and sold, cf. Jack Abramoff). I feel kind of neutral about this. Well, actually, here’s how I feel: it’s excellent for Mongolia to develop strong ties with America as they work out the kinks in their fledgling democracy. But George Bush and Condi Rice are just about the least credible Americans right now to go there and speak about it. I suspect in the current political disaster zone Bush has created for himself, he just wants a couple of cheap, feel-good headlines. Mongolia’s a famously hospitable place with interesting B-roll scenery and has no current or historical beef with the U.S., so at least Sukhbaatar Square won’t be jammed with thousands of protesters burning him in effigy like certain recent south-of-the-border jaunts.

Update: Looks like I spoke too soon. Guido at Mongolian Matters links to the info that there's already been a sizable, peaceful student demonstration in the Square. They're gonna repeat on Monday.

But I’ve been irked all week after reading the transcript of (right-wing, fundamentalist Christian) Eagle TV’s interview with Bush to which I was pointed by the lads at New Mongols. Nabetz over there seems convinced of the President’s sincerity. Maybe he’s right. But to me, it read like he was phoning it in, and the internal contradictions were so jarring to me I thought they were worth a little exploration. Here’s the President:

“First of all, there are certain values that are inherent in our country that any leader will bring to the White House: the value of human rights, human dignity, freedom to worship, freedom of the press, freedom to speak your mind. And so foreign policy will have inherent in it those values.”

Ordinarily, sure. Under this administration? You must be joking.

Human rights? One word: Guantanamo. With a side order of secret CIA gulag.

Human dignity?

Freedom to worship? OK, conceded.

Freedom of the press? Yes, but…

Freedom to speak your mind? Well, we all know I cherish that one.

Later on, Dear Leader again:

“On the other hand, I will say on your TV screens, there should be no corruption in government, that one of the foundations of any government is the ability for the people to trust the government, itself.”

It didn’t say in the transcript whether he was able to keep a straight face just there. This president who just sent his whole staff to remedial ethics school. His leadership in both houses is facing investigation, with others feeling the undertow of the Abramoff scandal. Libby’s under indictment, his NSA Hadley’s moving into Fitzgerald’s crosshairs, who knows about Rove and the rest of them in the nasty CIA leak scandal. And America is finally, finally waking up to the fact that they were knowingly sold a false bill of goods for the breathtaking debacle of Iraq and its numbing parade of needlessly snuffed-out lives.

And the rest is the typical pablum he always trots out, most of which falls under the “do as we say, not as we do” heading. There is so much about America that could inspire positive changes in this world, and this gang has somehow befouled all of it. The ’06 elections are really going to be something to watch.

Comments

[Mongol dude]

I wonder whatever happened to congresssional "freedom fries"...

Ordinary Americans living in Europe had a tough time last coupla years. Some of their comments:

You’ve finally brushed up on all American history, geography, current events, the Constitution and its amendments, and international policy (OK-Iraq) just to be able to participate intellligently in light daily conversation with your neighbors.

You’re no longer uncomfortably startled when your friends inquire, “So, did you vote for Bush?” Then quizzed, “I’m not sure about the American electoral college process – could you tell me exactly how it works, and why you think America will or will not continue using it? How does gerrymandering work?” Wah?

[GW]

To link President Bush with the mistakes made by a few enlistees at Abu Ghraib is a stretch. While I believe Bush is an ineffective leader, I side with Nabetz in the belief that Pres. Bush was sincere in his remarks to Eagle TV.

[Amber Carver]

You don't have to look as far away as Guantanamo or Iraq to see examples of the hypocrasy of Bush's statements. In the U.S. itself, neither human rights nor human dignity are guaranteed; millions of citizens go hungry and homeless while the government pours money into its misguided endeavors overseas.