Guess the Pundit
So, whose words are these?
Perhaps the most helpful change we can make is to change in our own thinking. In the West, there's been a certain skepticism about the capacity or even the desire of Middle Eastern peoples for self-government. We're told that Islam is somehow inconsistent with a democratic culture. Yet more than half of the world's Muslims are today contributing citizens in democratic societies. It is suggested that the poor, in their daily struggles, care little for self-government. Yet the poor, especially, need the power of democracy to defend themselves against corrupt elites.
Peoples of the Middle East share a high civilization, a religion of personal responsibility, and a need for freedom as deep as our own. It is not realism to suppose that one-fifth of humanity is unsuited to liberty; it is pessimism and condescension, and we should have none of it.
We must shake off decades of failed policy in the Middle East. [We] have been willing to make a bargain, to tolerate oppression for the sake of stability. Longstanding ties often led us to overlook the faults of local elites. Yet this bargain did not bring stability or make us safe. It merely bought time, while problems festered and ideologies of violence took hold.
As recent history has shown, we cannot turn a blind eye to oppression just because the oppression is not in our own backyard. No longer should we think tyranny is benign because it is temporarily convenient. Tyranny is never benign to its victims, and our great democracies should oppose tyranny wherever it is found.
Answer here. Please don't give it away before everyone's had a chance to guess.
- Comment (24)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
Seriously?
Oct '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
Popular political and social commentary is a fashion statement. At best, the content of articulated policy is an accessory. No matter how inane, it's the mellifluence of articulation that matters. Particularly if delivered with charm at the right parties.
Edited on Feb 13, 2011 at 6:57amJul '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
AngloCon gives away the game with: "No matter how inane, it's the mellifluence of articulation that matters."
It's got to be the Community Organizer. He could read a cereal box's ingredients off the teleprompter and awe a faculty club.
Dec '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
Your Grace: AngloCon gives away the game with: "No matter how inane, it's the mellifluence of articulation that matters."
It's got to be the Community Organizer. He could read a cereal box's ingredients off the teleprompter and awe a faculty club. · Feb 13 at 7:15am
[This comment has been removed by an editor.]
Edited on Feb 13, 2011 at 8:48amJun '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
I think Bush was on solid ground on the subject of Iraq, because Iraq is divided naturally into three strong independent factions. No theocracy is going to win over the majority in Iraq.
Oct '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
Stipulating that it is The One, well, then I guess we can scrap THAT theory. When has he ever spoken honestly or accurately?
All seriousness aside, I have yet to read anywhere a cogent rebuttal to Andy McCarthy's words from 2009 (emphases mine):
"President Bush decried the “cultural condescension” of us democracy doubters. But the shoe of arrogance is on the other foot. Those of us who’ve studied Islam have never doubted its “aptitude for democracy” (to borrow Will’s phrase). The issue has never been one of aptitude; it is about principled beliefs. Fundamentalist strains of Islam, including Salafism, have been developed by extraordinary minds. It is not that these Muslims fail to comprehend our principles; they reject them. They have an entirely different conception of the good life. They believe freedom is not individual liberty but individual submission to Allah’s law. Their very conception of freedom is the opposite of ours. When we talk to them about “freedom,” we are ships passing in the night."
I'm not saying McCarthy's omniscient, but has anyone ever refuted those words persuasively? If not, then The One is as he usually is: The Wrong One.
Oct '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
McCarthy finishes the thought thusly:
"That doesn’t make the Islamists backward. They are convinced that Western liberalism and the Judeo-Christian veneration of reason in faith are corrupting influences that rationalize deviations from Allah’s law and His natural order. They believe, instead, in a pre-ordered, totalitarian system in which the individual surrenders his freedom for the good of the umma — and in which sowing discord (i.e., engaging in what we think of as free speech) is a grave sin, on the order of apostasy. They are wrong in this. Our civilization is superior to theirs, which is why we have flourished and they have faltered. But being wrong doesn’t make them crazy. They don’t want what we’re selling, and they have their reasons."
From http://bit.ly/fbzVP9
Dec '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
I guessed right (pats self on back).
Sep '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
Condie?
Jan '11
Re: Guess the Pundit
A very interesting exercise - although I like to pretend I'm fairly objective, it's clear I'm not quite. There was a choice between two people in my mind - and given the content, I didn't know whether to be impressed by the prescience of the one, or the hypocrisy of the other.
In any case, we know that contents of speeches don't really reflect the actual discussions that happen behind closed doors.
Aug '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
Aug '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
I said it yesterday and it works today. ¡ Viva Bush ! In his fashion, he explodes the cloying condescension of the liberal, anxiously appeasing mindset that forces a template of relativism down on most of their bad decisions. He's one of the few in history that have succeeded post colonially.
Re: Guess the Pundit
Flownover! You gave away the secret! That's okay, we can all discuss it now. I find the cognitive dissonance fascinating--Erik's comment is I think exactly right. How much did knowing who said it change everyone's perception of the wisdom of the message?
Sep '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
The words sounded familiar, so I guessed correctly. I feel ever so slightly smug.
Knowing who said it didn't change my perception of the wisdom of the message. Just a wistful sigh that the man never got any credit for this, and now the liberals who mocked him are rushing to claim it for themselves.
May '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
I don't know whose words they are, but the sentiments belong to George W. Bush.
Aug '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
I certainly apologize for my premature congratulation, but I assign my culpability to etoiledunord . And if that doesn't wash, then I blame ASHTON KUTCHER
Edited on Feb 13, 2011 at 1:06pmAnd because the iPad won't link properly, heres the URL
http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/13/ashton-kutcher-claims-george-w-bush-snubbed-him-at-super-bowl/
Dec '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
Honestly, I cheated. However, I was reminded of my frustration with his father (and my father) when they defended our relationships with dictators, after the Cold War necessity waned. It was and is a time bomb.
Thought experiment: with or without the earthquake, where would Haiti be, now, if Bush 41 had made the diplomatically inexpensive call to Cedras, back in (around) 1991 and let him know that his world would end, if he didn't work towards meaningful reforms? Instead, we got Aristide, then further decline. What a waste of a phone call not made.
Oct '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
Didn't change mine. I disagreed with it from the outset, and still do.
Jul '10
Re: Guess the Pundit
The irony here is his journey from campaigning against America being the world's policeman to the President making this speech. Sadly, my guess was that bon vivant nouveau-riche enfant terrible Ashton Kutcher fellow, or maybe Dakota Fanning.
Actually, I knew I should know it and that all of my guesses were wrong, and that's as far as I got.
Speaking of secrets: Is it true that Claire will be playing Catwoman in the next Batman movie?
Edited on Feb 13, 2011 at 2:02pmJan '11
Re: Guess the Pundit
This speech, and the seeming ambiguity of the identity of the speaker reminds me of the Egyptian "revolution" in a way - the right views it as a consequence of the interventionism by GWB, whereas the left views it as the natural consequence of Obama's oration.