Can a cowboy be a president?

[15levels]

I am only curious. That moron which took over the White House seem to do a lot of damage to the frigile situation around the world, he is just as dumb as the cow he is trying to milk. Poor America, my sympaties.

[MJ]

Dear Rouben,

 

I am also curious as what makes you to say that?

[15levels]

Hey MJ,

 

Actually, I have lost all interest in America's politics since that above mentioned cowboy came to office, every time I see him speaking on TV I can't help think how dumb that man is. He doesnt make any sense. Leave alone his IQ, look at the changes that he brought to US' foreign policy. One after another, US looses all it's credibility, its kicked out of Human Rights commitee in UN (I wonder how did they let them there in the first place, as US is probably one of the biggest violators of human rights and we all know it), it's refusing to sign the ban on chemical warfare (threatning US security??!!, how so? People wanna ban war, but US says no!) and list can go on and on. Something is happening, most definitely. BBC the other day firmly stated, this is a NEW era in US foreign policy, I wonder who's making it, and at what price it is going to cost to the rest of the world.

 

Regards,

[MJ]

Ruben,

 

I, for example, have a totally different perspective on him and the US foreign policy, etc.

 

First, I think he is an extremely smart person, however he is very humble. He has Texan accent, and he is not a good orator. But is it bad or important? I listen to what he says very carefully. I pay no attention when he stumbles linguistically in his speach. I try to understand the essence of what he says. And as a rule, I can’t be more satisfied.

 

All this media fuss about his IQ has started from an interview of a Boston Globe correspondent, who asked him the names of the presidents of five third world countries. He gave two correct answers out of five. Not being experienced in relations with the national media, he didn’t figure out on the spot that he should’ve not allowed “being tested.” And then, this incident was taken way out of proportions and built up further, using his linguistic stumbles.

 

The media has been very unfair to him in the initial stage of his presidency. However, at least in the US, it has come to accept that it has underestimated him. Even the former president of the US has declared that he is being way underestimated. And the interesting thing is that Bush likes being underestimated. It is easier for him to push his agenda while being underestimated. So far, he has been successful in all issues, but one – his environmental image. It was obvious from the beginning that the environmental issues were going to be his biggest vulnerability, and that for his adversaries it was the easiest card to use against him. And he has not done well in dismissing this image so far. I hope he would pay more attention to this issue in the future. But this is a separate conversation.

 

You have to take into consideration, that he was a very successful governor prior to his presidency. He didn’t aspire to become president unlike some others. He was pressured by his colleagues, the fellow governors of about 30 US States to go for it. And these governors new him the best, because they had worked with him side-by-side for years.

 

As it pertains to the US foreign policy, in the previous 8 years the US basically didn’t have foreign policy. Something that the Europeans appreciated very much. The US foreign policy is finally getting on track after 8 years of neglect, which irritates the Europeans. He has one of the most competent foreign policy teams ever, and he has the support of most foreign policy experts in the US. He is not the person who makes up foreign policy. The US is not Armenia. The foreign policy here is an institutional issue. It is maid up by entire departments. There are a couple of foreign policy schools of thought in the US. He is representative of the most praised ever wing of the Kissingerian thought.

 

They indeed made a blunder when being kicked out from the Human Rights committee. And Colin Powell, the State Secretary was in fault here. But he was tricked and stubbed in the back by the Europeans, especially the Swedes. This was a dirty trick played in an arena, when things have been conducted on a gentlemanly level in the past. However, you have to take into consideration, I think, that while the US was kicked out, Libya and Sudan were let in. Then, I think we can make some conclusions about the motives of the voters.

 

I also want to mention that I strongly disagree that the US is “one of the strongest violators” of Human Rights, as you put it. What makes you to say that? Which Human Rights do you think the US violates so strongly. You can compare with /cgi-bin/forum/ultim...c&f=19&t=000031 , for example. I am not saying that the US has never violated the principles of Human Rights, but I think your statement is exaggerated.

 

I also would appreciate if you could inform as about the treaty on chemical warfare, the battleground, and if you could articulate why the US refuses to sign it. I think we would all benefit is we can somewhat diligently analyze the issue, and learn its details.

 

With all due respect, I never could take BBC or CNN serious, especially when it comes to world affairs. I personally see no threat to the world coming from the US, and I am puzzled at the superstitious allegations along these lines. I would be very interested in hearing a coherent and logical explanation of the character of these threats that somehow I cannot see on my own.

 

How’s your Web project coming along. Did you get volunteers to help?

 

Cheers,

Martin

[15levels]

Martin jan,

 

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion and thats perfectly fine. The whole politics are corrupted in basics, I would not mention words such as "integrity" or "credibility" when it comes to politicians. However I do beleive that European structures are somehow more democratic (and when I say that I reffer to those countries which do not have imperial ambitions or gave them up, not UK)

 

US is different ball game. Billions are runned to make presidential compains, people are being lied to, promised things and so on (let us shove Bush' credibility you know where, he lied to armenians also, but he is certainly not better than any other american president when it comes to armenians)...

I would not call myself an expert in politics, but I firmly beleive that the fish stinks from the head. The smell is bad.

You say Europeans are annoyed by US foreign policy. Yes they are. Here people do not like to take the role of the policeman of the world, which US is playing for past decades. They don't like when uncle Sam puts a veto on the decisions which are important for the whole planet: enviroment, chemical warfare, etc. I dont care for any "wins" or "looses" in political world, I only think that people like me and you are paying (and going to pay) the price.

 

Patriotism is a good thing, but vonz vor menk hayernenk asum: urishi achki mej posha tesnum isk ira achki mej geran chi nkatum. I hope you know what you mean

 

As for trusting or not trusting CNN or BBC, let us note that one cannot compare these too. CNN makes me "laugh", BBC gives me food for thought (in relative sense), however both represent it's governments therefore are never objective.

 

OK enough of politics, it makes me depressed. Let us care for our little country full of worries, our own house needs lots of cleaning before we can criticise anyone else.

 

Cheers

 

PS> Site is on hold, I am too busy with work but some people volunteered to help So it will be alright I suppose.

[15levels]

Well, yes, I agree with you and don't at the same time. I think you are too naive to think that Mister President (to be) was not well informed that he has to go out and lie to Armenians, perfectly knowing he cannot deliver none of his promises. So he is a lier, he knows it, we know it and everyone who payes attention how the same trick is played over and over again knows it. Some people exploit that further more, making deals, paying money for "lobbying", while another school built in Armenia on that money would be much more of a help. And with that kinda money one can build not one but maybe 20 schools. Yes, we all know that governmental structures in Armenia are very corrupted, but one can find ways to bypass their greedy pocket and help Armenia (n) directly. It's been done before.

 

I don't mean to disillusion you, Martin, but you are defending someone who doesnt deserve your patriotism. Bush yet has to proove he is a good president and can make balanced policy (which is not the case so far in my opinion). Lying to its voters doesnt help his reputation.

[MJ]

Rouben,

 

As you said before, I would start the cleaning from our own house. First, I would hold responsible our Armenian organizations, if they believed that Bush or anybody else is going to be able in the near future to sign what we expect them to sign on the subject of the Genocide at this time in history. If they didn’t believe it, but yet pursued it because of the decision that we have to do our best, then it is fine with me. We didn’t succeed this time, we will try again, and again.

 

I think Bush (as well as any other President) had two alternatives – to reply to the Armenian plea that he would sign a declaration on the Genocide or to say that he would not. To say that he would not sign would’ve meant, at least in my view, that he opposes personally to the recognition of the Genocide. I don’t believe that any of the previous Presidents, including Clinton, personally opposed it. Neither does Bush. His best bet would’ve been not to reply to the Armenian plea, at this time, I think. But you know, I assume, our organizations, and how pushy they may be. Therefore, if he had to reply, between the non-signing and signing he sure should’ve said, from his position, that he would sign. Additionally, he has not stopped the initiative of the Congress, the way his predecessor has done. So far, he has not yet declared his recognition of the Genocide as a President. As the French example demonstrates, the Genocide Resolution is more of a legislative initiative rather than executive. If the US Congress passes a resolution, and Bush kills it, I think we may have more valid points to against him. Remember, even the French recognition didn’t go smoothly. Whether he would sign a petition of the Congress under analogous to the last year circumstances, I don’t know. We would see. However, we have to come to accept that even we have different approaches on this issue among ourselves, while we all agree on the basics of the Genocide.

 

And I agree with your comments regarding the schools, etc. I care very little whether anybody would recognize the Genocide, though would do what depends on me to have that recognition. What I care is whether we wound find the strength and the wisdom to build a country that Armenians would be proud of, rather than denouncing for centuries their national identity in the manner of consistent assimilation.

 

And as Bush’ balanced policies go, I honestly think that he conducts very balanced policies. And things in such matters are seen only in comparison. As a US citizen, so far I am very happy with the US President, and I keep it constantly in mind that he is not the President of Armenia.

 

[ August 03, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[MJ]

I perfectly understand you, dear Rouben.

 

The thing is that historically, Europeans have been the source of the troubles for the whole world, one may say perhaps without exaggeration. One may start, perhaps from the Romans, Byzantians and the Crusaders. The world goes in cycles. At some point, after the WWII, the US has behaved in the same way in some respects. And yet, it has been much better than the Europeans can claim credit for. However, the negatives of the US has to be seen, I think, as USA vs. USSR. One may argue that it has done the things we don’t like as a countermeasure to the exportation of the World Revolution by USSR.

 

I don’t think that Bush deliberately lied to Armenians, as well as any of the previous Presidents. The only lying parties in that issue were the Armenian organizations, who wanted to make an impression that the Recognition of the Armenian Genocide depends on one or another President. I think Bush, from his heart, wanted to recognize the Genocide (as well as the previous Presidents), but when he came to the office, and was presented by the counterarguments by the Pentagon and the State Department – the career and not political officers, he couldn’t push for it, without considering the consequences in the international arena for the moment. The same is true about the prior Presidents. As it pertains to the electoral campaign in the US, it has gotten out of hand in the last 12 years or so. The public is very much concerned about it. It would be adjusted sooner or later, until lawyers find another loophole in the new system. This is a constant process.

However, I strongly discount the allegations about the Presidents doing “certain things because they get certain support from certain circles.” I don’t thing that’s how it works. There are different competing forces in the society as far as their beliefs about the governance and priorities are concerned. When you have two distinct presidential candidates, you make your choices who to support based on the totality of issues. There is no one issue which defines a person. In this sense, I just disagree when people say that this or the other President is doing this and that because his contributors have donated money to his campaign. I find it to be a very simplistic approach, in general.

You are absolutely right about objecting the US playing the role of the policeman of the world. That’s exactly what this President says, and what a lot of other politicians say in America. But the thing is, while Europeans may say they don’t want Armeniaca to be the policeman of the world, they forced it to do policing in Balkans, and even when the current president of the US tried to withdraw the American forces out of there, they (Europeans) fiercely opposed to the withdrawal. Additionally, the Europeans allowed for the slaughter of the Albanians in Balkans, as well as some slaughter of Serbians and Croatians in their back yard. The US policy of the last decade was deeply flawed in this regard. The current administration is trying to reverse it. As to vetoing the chemical warfare, sure it is better not to have chemical weapons. But the issue is I think more complicated that the US not willing to do so. Why wouldn’t the US want to do so, if it things the rest of the owners of chemical weapons are also ready to do so. The issue is, if say, the US signs it, the Europeans sign it, who else is going to sign it. In particular, is Iraq going to sign it? How about Turkey, Pakistan, etc. Besides, the current administration has not expressed an opinion on Chemical weapons, yet, has it?

I am not much interested in politics, either. Neither am I an expert in politics, nor enjoy it. I just think that it is always beneficial to express balanced views, or at least if some views seem to be not balanced, I try to introduce the other side of the issue to the best of my understanding. Otherwise, I prefer talking about jazz, art, photography, etc.

But I think we have to be even handed, if we decide to take a position. Not that I am saying one doesn’t have the right to support one side vs. the other. I am just saying there is no need to demonize the other side, especially when the facts don’t support it.

 

And I agree very much with your last statement about cleaning our house, first.

[Juggernaut]

quote

Can a cowboy be a president?

 

Only in America, Bro, only in America.....

[Azat]

I personally do not like Bush. I did not vote for him nor did the majority of the country. But he is the Selected president of US.

 

However, to just call him a cowboy and not giving him credit for his skills is not fair. He is a graduate of both Harvard and Yale(2 of the best schools in the world). He was the leader of Texas for 2 terms(state that is bigger than majority of the world countries). And even the former president said that after talking with Bush for an hour he felt closer to Bush than he did with Gore after working with him for 8 years.

 

The Armenian issue while it is sad that it was not recognized, it was something that we all knew was going to happen. Turkey is a good friend and partner of USA and US will be one of the last countries to recognize the issue. But I do believe that it will.

 

World police. If not USA than who? Who is going to be the police of the world. EU does not have the balls to step up to the plate. EU countries are acting like that saying "I hear nothing, I say nothing, I see nothing" and this can't be good for the world. Believe me I am not happy with all the things that we do here in the US. Kyoto treaty is one example where the US screwed up. We were the only nation not to sign the treaty, while I understand the reasons behind that decision, I do not agree with them. Tax cut was another.

 

Majority of this country is in love with Bush now because they are getting their tax rebate of $300 in the mail. He was super smart to give people a refund check and not just a tax cut next year, because this will do a lot for his reputation with the people.

 

Give him time I am sure he will do good work.

 

[ August 04, 2001: Message edited by: Azat ]

[alpha]

This, from a Canadian newspaper, is worth sharing.

 

 

America: The Good Neighbor.

 

 

Widespread but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from Toronto by Gordon Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator. What follows is the full text of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record:

 

"This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth.

 

Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.

 

When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped.

 

The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars! into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans.

 

I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes?

 

Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles.

 

You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon -! not once, but several times - and safely home again.

 

You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American

dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke.

 

I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.

 

Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those."

 

Stand proud, America!

 

This is one of the best editorials that I have ever read regarding the United States. It is nice that one man realizes it. I only wish that the rest of the world would realize it. We are always blamed for everything and never even get a thank you for the things we do.

[edward demian]

One has to live in the deep south for a few years to understand the southerners. Don't underestimate him. By the way guys. Southerners are not all Cowboys, and Cowboys are not all Southerners. The accent you hear is a slight Texan drawl. Southerners have a self deprecating way about them. Pride is a major sin amoung Baptists and the Southern Baptists reign throughout the South. I might have acquired some of those traits living among them. They are very powerful in government, in the Armed forces and aside from the Jews they are very influential in American foreign policy. We have not been successful in American foregn policy in equal measure that we have not cultivated relations with them. Atlanta, Georgia sports an Armenian population of several hundred and politically, we do well in Atlanta. Unfortunately the South is very large geografically, and it has not been a favored place for Armenian settlers. Turks have been settling in the South. All the Bosnian refugees have been setling there too.

[Paul bunyan]

Well, at least he's not like his unnbelievable Dad, George Bushie Sr

a mentally arrested individual who stopped growing mentally, and emotionally, at age thirteen. remember

that time Bush, a "man" who all his life has tried to be a carbon copy of

John Wayne flew uninvited to Japan and after barging into a state dinner for the Japanese Prime Minister, vomited all over the PM and passed out. he had a 102 degree fever.

 

"America's greatest strength is its voting public"~ Gen. Douglas MacArthur

 

"Demosia, istn de aristo ov America"

[Mehderian]

Those are very good points Alpha, but you'll never get most western Europeans to admit them. The idea that America is the most backwards abomination on the earth is constantly hammered into their heads by the schools and universities, even as our food, medical, and military aid is bailing out nation after nation around the world. It's easy for them to criticize our foreign policy as trying to police the world, but they sure didn't seem to mind us crushing Hitler for them. They also don't seem to mind that the technology that allows them to call themselves "industrialized nations" is almost all US invention. We have instead unfounded, unsupported, and obviously ludicrous statements like "the US is probably one of the biggest violators of human rights". Don't take this as bashing Europeans, there are plenty of people across the pond who appreciate America for the "good neighbor" that it is. It terrifies me to think what the world would be like today if the United States did not exist.

[Azat]

BRAVO. Well said.

By the way, the real answer to this topic, which I did not think about until just now is, Lyndon B. Johnson. I don't see many complaining about him being a cowboy president.