From the dark dungeons of the Internet
As I write this, the United States is at the polls electing its new president. It is not at all clear who will win, with Bush’s recent slim lead evaporating over the past couple of days. I have always enjoyed watching the progress of American elections, partly for the sheer bizarre quality of much of the process.
Every four years I find myself bemused by the vote to tell the electoral college how to vote, by the couple of months between the president’s election and his taking office, by the oddly stage-managed debates, and, most strange of all to someone who has grown up with the BBC and ITN, the reluctance of journalists to ask probing questions of the candidates.
Most of the time I watch the election coverage, I don’t much care who wins. Obviously, there would usually be one I would myself think of voting for if I were an American, but there is little real feeling that it matters to me — at least, not now that Reagan’s out of the picture; it was a little unnerving to know that the White House was occupied by someone who might start a nuclear war without knowing what he was doing.
Yes, the American president is in a sense the leader of the West, and, yes, the USA is the most powerful nation on Earth. I still say it does not really matter to the rest of us, for the simple reason that when push comes to shove America does what is good for America.
Every country does that, of course, but the difference is that America does what is good for America, full stop. If it is bad for any of the USA’s allies, too bad. There is no sense of there being a trading process based upon considerations of mutual interest. No quid pro quos here: in the end, the USA only considers its own interests, whoever is at the helm.
This time, however, a chill runs down my spine at the thought George W. Bush might be the next president. The awful truth is that he seems to be significantly more stupid than his father, who never came across as exactly a shining beacon of intellectual ability. Perhaps many people outside the USA have missed some of the choice examples of Bush’s lack of thought. Here’s a few examples:
“Drug therapies are replacing a lot of medicines as we used to know it.”
“I think we ought to raise the age at which juveniles can have a gun.”
“I mean, there needs to be a wholesale effort against racial profiling, which is illiterate children.”
“It’s going to require numerous IRA agents.”
“I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully.”
“It’s important for us to explain to our nation that life is important. It’s not only life of babies, but It’s life of children living in, you know, the dark dungeons of the Internet.”
“I think if you know what you believe, it makes it a lot easier to answer questions. I can’t answer your question.”
Many, many more are on the Web; take a look, it is almost unbelievable. If you scour some of the news stories out there, you can find much more discussion of his inability to coherently express a single idea, except when he gets it dead wrong. For example, when he suggested it was time that Europeans bore some of the load in Kosova… where, in fact, less than 20% of the troops on the ground are from the USA.
This is deeply worrying. His whole demeanour is of someone who doesn’t know much and cares even less. The idea of such a man in charge of the most powerful nation on the planet should worry everyone.
But is this so bad, really? After all, Reagan and Bush père were no rocket scientists, were they?
No, they weren’t — I recall a story told of an Australian journalist who had the opportunity to interview Reagan coming away and saying he had a frightening intellect.
However, the world was a little simpler then. There was an enemy, and the world was divided along fairly clear lines. In Bush’s time, he could bask in the warmth of perceived victory as the enemy collapsed.
The world is more complicated now: Russia is far from stable, the Middle East is more tense than it has been for some time — hardly the time when the West should be “led” by someone who seems not even to know what he himself thinks.
Do I really need to mention the ecological problems we face and the doubts anyone must have that Bush would do anything to tackle these problems? Assuming he understands them…
Which necessarily brings Dan Quayle to mind, since he once said something to the effect that pollution isn’t the problem, it’s all the chemicals getting pumped into the environment. I think that George W. isn’t as dumb as Quayle, but it is a close call. Odd that so many people who were horrified at the thought of Captain Potatoe becoming president should the incumbent get himself killed see nothing strange about the equally brilliant Bush running for the office.
Al Gore, on the other hand, may not be the finest possible president — it was amusing to see Michael Moore on the news saying “These are not the best America has to offer!” — but at least you can feel quite comfortably assured that he would never get a brain scan result: NEGATIVE.
I am now putting the finishing touches to this site update as the first news is coming in of the results. It is beginning to look as though Gore will take Florida and Michigan, possibly Pennsylvania too — perhaps the (slightly) better man is winning after all.
© DC 2000. All rights reserved.