Inaugural Fisking

I mocked the Inaugural speech a few hours ago by saying it was not memorable. And from a presentation point of view it was not. W is just not a good public speaker. However there were some things in the text that were well stated and in some cases significant statements of policy. (Although no big changes). So I thought I would give the speech another shot in written form. Glancing over it, it is a much better speech when read than when listening to W deliver it. So here goes. My first fisking in a long time.

George W. Bush Second Inaugural Address

Vice President Cheney, Mr. Chief Justice, President Carter, President Bush, President Clinton, reverend clergy, distinguished guests, fellow citizens:

On this day, prescribed by law and marked by ceremony, we celebrate the durable wisdom of our Constitution, and recall the deep commitments that unite our country. I am grateful for the honor of this hour, mindful of the consequential times in which we live, and determined to fulfill the oath that I have sworn and you have witnessed.

At this second gathering, our duties are defined not by the words I use, but by the history we have seen together. For a half century, America defended our own freedom by standing watch on distant borders. After the shipwreck of communism came years of relative quiet, years of repose, years of sabbatical – and then there came a day of fire.

9/11 reference pretty much as soon as the thank you part was done. I guess this is to be expected. He has stated over and over that it was a transformative moment for him and his policies. And it’s not bad I guess, it was an important milestone and changing point. But I sort of felt myself sighing at that point. “Here he goes again.”

We have seen our vulnerability – and we have seen its deepest source. For as long as whole regions of the world simmer in resentment and tyranny – prone to ideologies that feed hatred and excuse murder – violence will gather, and multiply in destructive power, and cross the most defended borders, and raise a mortal threat. There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of human freedom.

I actually agree with every word, and it is stated well. I’m not sure that W’s actions actually bear out the philosophy he is stating though. For one, there seems to only be one or two regions of the world where he seems to apply this doctrine, whereas large swaths of the globe that in many cases are in even worse shape go ignored. Second, I don’t see his domestic actions very much promoting freedom. I see crack downs on civil liberties, expansion of government power in many directions, restrictions on the free exchange of information (including support of overly draconian intellectual property laws as well as increased “morality” type crackdowns at the FCC and in other ares to cut down on “indecent” material), plus a distinct lack of tolerance in many areas.

We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.

America’s vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one. From the day of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth. Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. Advancing these ideals is the mission that created our Nation. It is the honorable achievement of our fathers. Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation’s security, and the calling of our time.

So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.

This is not primarily the task of arms, though we will defend ourselves and our friends by force of arms when necessary. Freedom, by its nature, must be chosen, and defended by citizens, and sustained by the rule of law and the protection of minorities. And when the soul of a nation finally speaks, the institutions that arise may reflect customs and traditions very different from our own. America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way.

The great objective of ending tyranny is the concentrated work of generations. The difficulty of the task is no excuse for avoiding it. America’s influence is not unlimited, but fortunately for the oppressed, America’s influence is considerable, and we will use it confidently in freedom’s cause.

Wow. I once again find myself agreeing with the sentiment entirely. And it is well said. W’s speech writer did well. (Too bad he didn’t deliver it very well… another speaker could have made this really ring…) But once again where I hit trouble is not with the sentiment of the statement, but in my confidence in W implementing any such policy in a way that actually achieved the goals, rather than just screwing everything up even more badly. W has stated these sorts of goals before. Many times. But every thing he has DONE seems to completely backfire if these are indeed his goals. I see that some of the things he does he may intend to have these consequences. But, at least so far, the results are not in line with the goals.

To be fair, it has been a very short time. Policies of the sort espoused often take many years, if not many decades, to bear fruit. In many ways it is simply too early to judge. As an example, in the case of Ronald Reagan to me at least his hard line stance with the Soviet Union in the first part of his administration seemed foolhardy at best. But in the many years since the cold war, person after person from the old USSR has said that those policies had a very direct affect on the eventual opening of the Eastern Block and the end of the Cold War. (There are still some that disagree, but at the very least, the consensus has moved closer to Reagan’s side in the last 15 years than it was during his presidency.) My only point here is that sometimes things that seem misguided at the time can later come to be seen as the right thing to have done in retrospect… Sometimes because the person was actually much more insightful than was though… sometimes just because they were lucky and a gamble paid off. So in the end, we’ll have to wait at least 10 to 15 years before we have a better idea if W’s choices were really as stupid as they seem today.

My most solemn duty is to protect this nation and its people against further attacks and emerging threats. Some have unwisely chosen to test America’s resolve, and have found it firm.

We will persistently clarify the choice before every ruler and every nation: The moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom, which is eternally right. America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies.

We will encourage reform in other governments by making clear that success in our relations will require the decent treatment of their own people. America’s belief in human dignity will guide our policies, yet rights must be more than the grudging concessions of dictators; they are secured by free dissent and the participation of the governed. In the long run, there is no justice without freedom, and there can be no human rights without human liberty.

Does anybody else think that while this sounds awesome, the way we have played fast and loose with the Geneva convention, and tried to create situations where the accused can be held with no appeal and no access to legal help or family for indefinite times, etc makes this ring very very hollow. If Jimmy Carter said these words, or even Bill Clinton… or George H. W. Bush… I would believe them. With W’s record, I think he is hypocritical at best.

Some, I know, have questioned the global appeal of liberty – though this time in history, four decades defined by the swiftest advance of freedom ever seen, is an odd time for doubt. Americans, of all people, should never be surprised by the power of our ideals. Eventually, the call of freedom comes to every mind and every soul. We do not accept the existence of permanent tyranny because we do not accept the possibility of permanent slavery. Liberty will come to those who love it.

Today, America speaks anew to the peoples of the world:

All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.

Democratic reformers facing repression, prison, or exile can know: America sees you for who you are: the future leaders of your free country.

The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: “Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it.”

The leaders of governments with long habits of control need to know: To serve your people you must learn to trust them. Start on this journey of progress and justice, and America will walk at your side.

And all the allies of the United States can know: we honor your friendship, we rely on your counsel, and we depend on your help. Division among free nations is a primary goal of freedom’s enemies. The concerted effort of free nations to promote democracy is a prelude to our enemies’ defeat.

I sense a theme in my reactions to W here. This sounds great. If this was really and truly applied as policy, and applied universally, it would probably be a good thing. But I can only see W applying this sort of thing cynically and opportunistically, and even then, screwing it up every time he tried by being too ham handed and too full of hubris.

Today, I also speak anew to my fellow citizens:

From all of you, I have asked patience in the hard task of securing America, which you have granted in good measure. Our country has accepted obligations that are difficult to fulfill, and would be dishonorable to abandon. Yet because we have acted in the great liberating tradition of this nation, tens of millions have achieved their freedom. And as hope kindles hope, millions more will find it. By our efforts, we have lit a fire as well – a fire in the minds of men. It warms those who feel its power, it burns those who fight its progress, and one day this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world.

A few Americans have accepted the hardest duties in this cause – in the quiet work of intelligence and diplomacy … the idealistic work of helping raise up free governments … the dangerous and necessary work of fighting our enemies. Some have shown their devotion to our country in deaths that honored their whole lives – and we will always honor their names and their sacrifice.

All Americans have witnessed this idealism, and some for the first time. I ask our youngest citizens to believe the evidence of your eyes. You have seen duty and allegiance in the determined faces of our soldiers. You have seen that life is fragile, and evil is real, and courage triumphs. Make the choice to serve in a cause larger than your wants, larger than yourself – and in your days you will add not just to the wealth of our country, but to its character.

Yeah. OK. Standard support the troops and everybody should do stuff to help the country stuff. Next.

America has need of idealism and courage, because we have essential work at home – the unfinished work of American freedom. In a world moving toward liberty, we are determined to show the meaning and promise of liberty.

In America’s ideal of freedom, citizens find the dignity and security of economic independence, instead of laboring on the edge of subsistence. This is the broader definition of liberty that motivated the Homestead Act, the Social Security Act, and the G.I. Bill of Rights. And now we will extend this vision by reforming great institutions to serve the needs of our time. To give every American a stake in the promise and future of our country, we will bring the highest standards to our schools, and build an ownership society. We will widen the ownership of homes and businesses, retirement savings and health insurance – preparing our people for the challenges of life in a free society. By making every citizen an agent of his or her own destiny, we will give our fellow Americans greater freedom from want and fear, and make our society more prosperous and just and equal.

All good so far.

In America’s ideal of freedom, the public interest depends on private character – on integrity, and tolerance toward others, and the rule of conscience in our own lives. Self-government relies, in the end, on the governing of the self. That edifice of character is built in families, supported by communities with standards, and sustained in our national life by the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Koran, and the varied faiths of our people. Americans move forward in every generation by reaffirming all that is good and true that came before – ideals of justice and conduct that are the same yesterday, today, and forever.

Notice that Koran bit? Gotta do that. Have to show religious tolerance and inclusion and all that.

In America’s ideal of freedom, the exercise of rights is ennobled by service, and mercy, and a heart for the weak. Liberty for all does not mean independence from one another. Our nation relies on men and women who look after a neighbor and surround the lost with love. Americans, at our best, value the life we see in one another, and must always remember that even the unwanted have worth.

When I listened the first time, I read this as an abortion reference. But he did not follow that topic up at all. So maybe, maybe not. Probably intentionally put in as something that that pro-lifers could read into, but without explicitly saying anything.

And our country must abandon all the habits of racism, because we cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry at the same time.

Another good line. And frankly, I believe W believes it… as long as it has to do with Americans. I’m not so sure however that he acts in a way that would make sense if he truly felt that all lives were equally valueable regardless of creed and national origin. I see a lot more tolerance for dead Iraqi’s than I do for dead Americans. And dead Sudanese do not even register. Yes, American’s are the US President’s direct responsibility, while citizens of other places are not. However, if one truly feels that all humans are worth of the full level of rights… then why should it take orders of magnitude more suffering among “furiners” before it gets even close to the amount of attention as it would if it were here at home.

From the perspective of a single day, including this day of dedication, the issues and questions before our country are many. From the viewpoint of centuries, the questions that come to us are narrowed and few. Did our generation advance the cause of freedom? And did our character bring credit to that cause?

Not bad questions. Ask me again in 2015 or 2020 and perhaps I’ll have a little better persective on how you did on your watch. At the moment, it does not look good.

These questions that judge us also unite us, because Americans of every party and background, Americans by choice and by birth, are bound to one another in the cause of freedom. We have known divisions, which must be healed to move forward in great purposes – and I will strive in good faith to heal them.

Ha. OK. I just don’t see this happening. I don’t see a good chance of W really reaching out to heal any divisions, and frankly even if he did, I doubt it would get a warm reception at this point. Nobody is in the mood for compromise. Which is a shame.

Yet those divisions do not define America. We felt the unity and fellowship of our nation when freedom came under attack, and our response came like a single hand over a single heart. And we can feel that same unity and pride whenever America acts for good, and the victims of disaster are given hope, and the unjust encounter justice, and the captives are set free.

Except of course our captives. Many of which were later found to be completely innocent. Lets not discuss those.

We go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom. Not because history runs on the wheels of inevitability; it is human choices that move events. Not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation; God moves and chooses as He wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind, the hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul. When our Founders declared a new order of the ages; when soldiers died in wave upon wave for a union based on liberty; when citizens marched in peaceful outrage under the banner “Freedom Now” – they were acting on an ancient hope that is meant to be fulfilled. History has an ebb and flow of justice, but history also has a visible direction, set by liberty and the Author of Liberty.

When the Declaration of Independence was first read in public and the Liberty Bell was sounded in celebration, a witness said, “It rang as if it meant something.” In our time it means something still. America, in this young century, proclaims liberty throughout all the world, and to all the inhabitants thereof. Renewed in our strength – tested, but not weary – we are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom.

May God bless you, and may He watch over the United States of America.

Good ending, could have done without some of the God stuff, but hey, it is W and that is traditional in this sort of thing. And it is a sentiment I can not disagree with.

Which was true of a lot of this speech. He spoke of big overarching ideals. Freedom is good. Tyranny is bad. Good guys are good, bad guys are bad. Lots of things that just plain sound good. It is a wonderful world he paints. A lot of good goals. The world should be better. There should be more freedom. Woo!

For the most part, I do not disagree with the visions he paints. And there are no specifics here, so there is not much meat to disagree with. But of course, that is where the problems are. Not in the goals, but in the implementation. And in some cases the interpretation of those goals when determining how they apply in certain cases.

W’s administration so far has time after time shown that they interpret these things far differently than I do. What they often see as “defending freedom” I often see as restricting it. And even when I can see their goal is good, they seem to always pick ways of trying to get that goal which I think are counterproductive, and more than likely will not achieve the stated goal (although perhaps in some cases, they will achieve unstated goals.)

I think it all comes down to trust. Four years ago I could buy that “Compassionate Conservative” line. I could think that W would be like his father. Basically the first President Bush was reasonable and pragmatic. “Prudent” is the word that got hung around his neck. Nobody would ever think of describing W as prudent. Instead he is reckless and bullheaded to the extreme. Even when he means well, he causes damage. If the first President Bush was back in office, and he gave this speech, I might very well think positively about it. But W has lost any small bit of trust I might have had 4 years ago. I do believe he believes and means what he says. I don’t get a sense of duplicity. But I do not trust that his values match mine. (I know they do not.) And I do not trust that he has the capacity of successfully carrying out even a good policy, let alone the monstrosities they have come up with so far. Almost everything they touch gets screwed up.

There is going to be a mostly new cabinet though. And that makes a huge difference. And in second terms Presidents tend to think more long term than they do in first terms, because they are thinking about their legacy, not about reelection. Many second terms have turned out to have shockingly different characters than first terms. Perhaps that will be the case this time.

That would be nice. (Assuming the change was in the right direction.)

Welp, buckle up. Time to watch another interesting four years.