Current Events — HabitableZone

Current Events » in reply to So you hired him November 2?

He is the President. He is a public servant. I am part of the public. Next!
Mary Anne — (archived)

The President of the United States takes an oath to serve all the people, not merely his or her supporters. So, yes, he is my employee, as of January 2005. He is also, incidentally, paid his salary out of Federal taxes, not out of the Republican Party's treasury. My money, just like everyone else's.

You believe he is acting like other Presidents. Well, we have had mendacious people in office before. We have had ferocious partisans before. So, in that way, yes. If he were really interested in the interests of the people, he would spend more time consulting with all of their representatives. But he doesn't do that. He consults with the ones he likes.

You find me a place where I said the UN was saintly and unreproachable, or anything even vaguely approaching that. What the UN is is an international institution with broad representation, virtually the only one we have that has as many interests and branches as it does. Mr. Bolton has shown a propensity to tell people off, which is not a strong qualification in an organization almost entirely based on persuasion. But he is the President's man, that I grant you.

If we want people to act in a certain way, we need to act that way to them. This is long-term thinking, because it takes a long time to change people's attitudes this way. If we want them to react to us, that's a different thing. It produces short-term results and builds no relationships. We, of course, need no relationships because we will be protected from foreign encroachment by our oceans and can live off the limitless resources within our borders.

Re: my "inconsistency": If you will note Tom's post to which I replied "Actually, no, it's about Bolton", Tom said that this goes back to "Bush hatred", though not in those exact words. (Heaven help us if I draw an inference talking to you and don't explain it thoroughly!) At that point, I was reminded of an old saying they use to teach young doctors about diagnosis: "When you see hoofprints, think 'horses'." Appointment debates are very often not part of a mob mentality, but about the person who has been nominated. Tom said, "Actually, no, it's about Bush", because the whole idea here is to make sure that all objections of any kind are turned around to make it look that way. I countered with an equally possible, and far more likely, option: that it's actually about what people involved say it's about. You think I'm inconsistent? That's just fine. Thank God I need not conform to your opinion of me.

I don't know anyone who thinks the UN couldn't use a good housecleaning. Sending an abrasive apparatchik to represent the most powerful nation in the world (for the next 20 years or so) will not achieve that end. So why does this continue? Because the President wants it his way, all the time.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (81 posts)