Yes, the message Bush sent was that we prefer democratically elected representatives for the Palestinians that please the United States.
At that point in the intifada and Bush's reluctant involvement, by lack of simple omission he did not include meeting international standards, just American ones. Acting in concert with the United Nations was the last thing Dubya and his Old Guard thought to do. They'd given up on the UN doing what it needed to do and unilaterally proceeded beyond without bothering to go through even the motions of gaining sanctions to do so in the international community that we spent the last half of the last century building. Only by the force of public debate and the checks and balances that require other elected representatives to weigh in and sign off, have we seen any movement toward following the rules we insist everyone else must follow. I think Harry gives Bush & Co. more credit than they deserve: they contrived to move forward along these lines, then worked backwards to justify their decision. The dirty little secret of this administration is that 9/11 gave them what they could not do otherwise: a very public excuse to make terrorism the centerfold of their aggressive policy. This has become so all consuming that economic policy and the state of the union have become secondary. It is consuming precisely because it is personal, not just for Bush fils but for these old men trying to correct and retract what took place during the Reagan - Bush administrations. It's not retribution driving them, its redemption. We've had two Adams as presidents, cousins in the Roosevelt's and so far spared a Kennedy succession. Now that oil money succeeded in stampeding a novice Bush fils past stronger GOP candidates in the primaries, let's hope that Jimmy Carter's sons, or Clintons' daughter don't get the wild idea to enter politics and run for the presidency to complete the legacy of their father. We split with England and felt compelled to create something new and unique for those very reasons. It's damn frustrating having an international crisis of this proportion while Bush is finishing Politics 101 and moving on to more sophisticated under grad work. We are witnessing a rookie learning on the job presidency, as sometimes happens, with Old Guard wise men on hand who still think in terms of yesterday's solutions for today's problems. Regardless of IQ, none of them impress me as being visionary philosophers or anything visionary. I can respect politicians who agonize over a difficult decision, sometimes confounding their supporters and taking off against their own prior history. Making each decision independently is messier and harder. I cannot respect those who act on behalf of the nation out of a prescribed agenda, on remote control autopilot, following a recipe, like so many of the Newt Gingrich graduates of the Contract with America class we see casting votes in Congress today. We need more independent thinkers not loyal followers. Wisdom and experience come from risks and mistakes as well as success and good judgment. I fear most those who seem too sure of their correctness, so confident of the outcome, so certain of their position. Karen Brad wrote: Bush has already explained to the Palestineans that people have a right to elect who they choose. But, he continued, THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES, and if the people elect people America does not like, they cannot expect America to look approvingly on the situation. We trust you are LISTENING, children, and that you will DO THE RIGHT THING. http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/quotes2.html#Q110 Bill wrote: What blows my mind is Bush's assumption that he can introduce a friendly regime in Baghdad. This is quite unlikely. If anyone has been following the election returns in Pakistan, Islamic fundamentalists made a strong showing. Of course, we are backing a military dictator in Pakistan, which is always our favorite. What I see happening is a toppling of the Sa'ud family and the instituting of a regime much closer to what we have in Iran. Kuwait will be the next to go. In fact, we are going to realize that we should have been courting the Iranians since, as Tom Friedman argues, they are moving in a rational direction. My feeling is that this is what will be needed to move beyond fundamentalism to the more moderate government which exists in Iran at this point.
