 |
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 |
Bush Stands Before UN
If the UN were a forest of trees, and Bush were a bush, would a speaking bush be heard? Probably not, especially since the bush doesn’t speak the same language as the trees.
I admit, that's a silly question; but the intent points to the stark differences between what Bush represents and what the UN has represented since its beginning. On this note, Bush arrived at the UN today in hopes that the words he’d speak and the assistance he would seek would be understood and accepted. Standing in the place where he once stood to tell the UN they should act or become irrelevant, it was Bush himself who was and is on the verge of being irrelevant--irrelevant to a world who can't trust him, who feels bullied by him, and irrelevant to a nation who is wearying of his administration's lack of control of the Iraq recovery, it's continuing secrecy over the 9/11 reports, and it's prevarications.
After the rhetoric that spewed from the administration, aimed at the UN, over their valid reservations and disapproval of going to war in Iraq, one should not question why Bush’s speech might fall upon disinterested ears. In the end, the replies were about our war tactics.
Kofi Annan leveled with the US that their pre-emptive war policy threatened the policy the UN had existed under since it was created. Evelyn Leopold of Reuters today wrote the following about Annan’s comments:
[Annan] questioned U.S. arguments that nations have the "right and obligation to use force preemptively" against unconventional weapons systems even while they were still being developed and said the U.N. Charter allowed military action for the purpose of self defense.
"But until now it has been understood that when states go beyond that and decide to use force to deal with broader threats to international peace and security, they need the unique legitimacy provided by the United Nations," he said.
"Now some say this understanding is no longer tenable since an 'armed attack' with weapons of mass destruction could be launched at any time..." said Annan.
"This logic represents a fundamental challenge to the principles, on which, however imperfectly, world peace and stability have rested for the last 58 years," he said.
For an excellent analysis and commentary on Bush’s speech and its aftermath, please read Eric Boehlert’s article in Salon, "Bush, Chirac Clash at UN."
6:52:09 PM  | |
|
|
The Incredible Shrinking Poll Figures
In a latest national CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll yesterday, Bush’s approval rating has sunk to the lowest since he was made president, at 50%. This is absolutely an incredible figure in light of his 71% approval rating in April and 59% approval rating in August. To make matters worse for the re-election team is the fact that this poll also showed that Clark would beat the president 49 to 46 percent if the election were held today.
Of course, and I will say this again, it really is too early to get excited about this. However, this does reveal much. LiberalOasis blog today, titled "Bush Hits 50%" is a good read, if you are interested in getting an excellent analysis.
If you want more analysis about the recent polls from September 18, please see the article Taking the Plunge, by Ruy Teixeira at TomPaine.com.
On a side note, in regards to the president’s popularity, Drew Vogel at Terminus nicely meanders his way through a philosophical exercise on what popular means?
In regards to the reasons for Bush’s popularity demise, Steve at Absit Invidia (in his post titled Cynicism) gives us one reason and points readers to an article by Richard Reeves that states a few more.
6:35:57 PM | |
|
|
|
|
