116 Comments

1. Jamie Irons:

Roger,

No kidding! By far the best defenses of American foreign policy appear on blogs, of all places. This says worlds about the administration’s hapless public relations abilities. And at a moment like this! It’s time for the Bush people to look around for help. They need spokespeople with some linguistic ability. I’m serious…

I’m glad you’re addressing this. By chance Nina and I were discussing this very issue earlier this morning. It is profoundly depressing that the Bushies seem absolutely tongue-tied (not just Bush himself) when it comes to clarifying what we’re up against, and inspiring us to fight. Unless the Lord works in very strange ways indeed, I think our inability to talk coherently, and passionately, about the war we are fighting, is going to do us in.

I wonder what other readers think, by the way, about what the proportion of our public might be, that truly “gets it?”

My guess is ten to twenty percent.

All because of a failure of leadership in the crucial arena of communication.

And, only slightly OT, everyone needs to take a look at Tactics, Strategy, Grand Strategy: A Warning over at “The Fourth Rail.”

Jamie Irons

Aug 12, 2005 - 9:31 am 2. Keith_Indy:

Respectfully – what would you suggest they do?

Pay someone to give them good press? Oh yeah, they already got into trouble for that.

Give speeches declaring the vitality and success of our efforts? Already doing that, although not always elegantly. The message from the speeches are spot on if you read them.

And even when they do this, the press isn’t obligated to cover it, either on tv, or newspapers. And even if they do cover it, there’s nothing that guarantees the message will not be distorted.

Start a PSA campaign to do the same? This will be decried as propoganda by anti-war/anti-Bush leftists in the MSM, who will give them free air time in the name of equal access.

Direct mailings? Low success rate.

Really though, with the large part of the main stream media being anti-Bush, to the point of not being willing to give our efforts in Iraq a fair play, I don’t see how the administration can overcome this.

Aug 12, 2005 - 9:36 am 3. dan cliff:

But the BBC doesn’t clip and snip whatever a blog says… Thus “ineptitude” is a hard, or impossible, thing to overcome. Bush (and the administration) is often eloquent and able, in fact, but in order to be heard you must have people willing to listen and the foreign media, guided by the American media and the propagandists like Moore, is in the end a gatekeeper whose duty is to make Bush fit into their profile. It was the same with Reagan. Which is not to say a more effective job can’t be done. Bigger stick. Less talk. Not more. If you’re worried about linguistic ability and eloquence as defined by the MSM and the professorial class, and jumping over their hurdles, then you’re playing right into their hands. Don’t need to please them (or Clive) in my opinion. Enough people around the world get the game. Do need to finish the job and stop diddling around.

Aug 12, 2005 - 9:38 am 4. Keith_Indy:

Well, I was thinking about this in the context of people like Casey Sheehan, who wants to know “why her son died?” She was going on about how the administration keeps changing the justification as things “prove” false.

Well, if I were the President, I’d put an effort into rehashing what actually was said, in speeches, and testimony in the run up to the Iraq War. It is demonstrable that multiple justifications existed besides weapons of mass destruction. One need only look at the Iraq resolution passed by Congress, and 1441, to see there were multiple reasons.

But whatever the message, how do you get it out so that people actually hear it, and hear it without the “gatekeepers” distorting it.

Advertisments which will be discounted as propoganda?

One thing I would like to see is getting our true heros on a tour of the United States. Schools, sporting games, fairs. Bring the faces of those who serve honorably in front of the American public. Let them tell why they serve, and why Iraq is important.

That may be one way of getting the message out that would be hard to counter. But it would require taking these valuable men and women off the line.

Aug 12, 2005 - 9:51 am 5. Keith_Indy:

that should have been Casey Sheehans mom or Cindy Sheehan…

Aug 12, 2005 - 9:59 am 6. jdm:

> he sheer ineptitude of the administration’s

> public relations has been astounding.

I agree – it also applies to more than this war.

Keith seems also correct, however, although I would submit that Bush’s case would be more broadly popularized if Bush was more of a publicity slut (like a certain other previous president who served just before the present Bush and just after the previous Bush).

I think the biggest problem with Davis’ claim, however, is that the BBC & its ilk have been up to their shenanigans for roughly 50 years. The notion that Bush & Co could, whoop-dee-presto, overcome what amounts to two generations of anti-Americanism with a little more effort is ludicrous.

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:03 am 7. Jamie Irons:

I’m sorry — and I mean this respectfully — but it is just not convincing to blame the MSM, treasonous as they are (in my view), for Bush’s failures as a communicator, and his failure to find somebody, anybody, to do this job for him.

Rumsfeld was formerly a superb, if rather overly blunt, communicator. He seems to be “off line,” if not entirely off the reservation.

I think we need to honestly admit that we are on the verge of losing in Iraq because Bush just cannot make his case. (Though I agree he has done a good job of making his case in a number of major speeches; there just seems to be no follow up effort, and in the case of Israel and the “Palestinians,” Bush seems to have forgotten his own eloquently expressed message.)

I am discouraged.

Jamie Irons

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:06 am 8. AK:

After having lived in Europe, I’d say “provincial” is exactly the right word. Almost shockingly so in many places. But in many other cases, I believe the narrow view of America is purposely chosen to support an ideology.

And this has been going on a lot longer than Bush and his inept ambassador.

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:12 am 9. wxjames:

If it were me, I would play hardball. For starters, I would escort out of the White House press room anyone who does not give me good press. That would reduce those with stories of the highest value. It would also ensure that no gotcha questions arise there. When I have a picnic, I don’t invite people who talk about me behind my back, nor those who hold me in contempt, for any reason.

I would also make a recess appointment to the Supreme Court. The most right winger I could find.

Bush is a simple man. He doesn’t play politics well nor dirty. The worst thing is that he does not lead well. Didn’t he just sign a transportation bill awash in pork ? Does he leave it up to Delay to do all the heavy lifting ? Where’s the team effort ?

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:24 am 10. Fresh Air:

This is such a non-story. Europeans have been envious of America for nearly 100 years. George Bush’s presidency is but a dot on the landscape of time. Besides, can this vast carnival of ours (as Tom Wolfe puts it) really be represented by the president in any meaningful sense? Absurd.

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:24 am 11. Keith_Indy:

For starters, I would escort out of the White House press room anyone who does not give me good press.

*************

OK, now that you’ve cleared the room except for 4 or 5 reporters, and the rest you’ve alienated, so they wont be giving you any good press for the remainder…

There’s no easy solution to getting good airplay.

I wasn’t trying to jusitfy the administrations failure at this, just give a mitigating circumstance.

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:38 am 12. dan cliff:

Jamie,

Reagan was forever on the “verge” of igniting nuclear annihilation and was certainly not the “great communicator” in the eyes of the press and much of the world during the eighties. Lincoln, too, couldn’t explain a thing. Was inept. Heck, we can go back to the Athenians and their carping against their Bushes and Reagans and Churchills. Same old, same old.

I’m certainly not “blaming” the media, merely pointing out how the media acts. Has always acted. Somehow I fail to understand your point, I guess. True, there is only a certain window of opportunity to get things done when a democracy wages battle, and I for one have problems with the energy America has exerted over the past few years, but the media and its coverage is neither here nor there, nor is it, in my belief, a cause of being on the “verge” of anything. Facts on the ground and decisions made are the causes, not the interpretation of such things by the talking classes. Not to mention Bush did get re-elected. And if anything the world is trending towards and not away from a Bush way of looking at things. (Especially, and this can’t be understood until after the fact, like the Soviet Union in the eighties, in places like China.)

Anyway, I hear this kind of useless moaning (a bit harsh, and I apologize) a lot from 9/11 Democrats (Not that I know you are one, just saying…) who at heart, somewhere deep therein, still desire some omnipotent orator creating that elusive kumbaya moment where everyone in the whole world gets it. You can hope for this kind of phenomena all you want, but in the end you’ll only be fooled by a Clinton or worse.

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:54 am 13. Mark_Belt:

Although nothing can be done about it in a free society, you can’t underestimate the damage done by American pop culture. A Londoner in a pub once asked me if I carried a weapon while walking the streets of Denver. When I answered “No,” he seemed surprised–he watched American television in Britain that showed robbery, murder, rape, car chases, and general mayhem in the streets. When I explained that the average American has never been raped, robbed, or witnessed a murder, he didn’t believe me and cited our television exports as “evidence.”

Aug 12, 2005 - 11:41 am 14. Steven Mitchell:

“I think we need to honestly admit that we are on the verge of losing in Iraq because Bush just cannot make his case. (Though I agree he has done a good job of making his case in a number of major speeches; there just seems to be no follow up effort, and in the case of Israel and the “Palestinians,” Bush seems to have forgotten his own eloquently expressed message.)”

Yet despite all the yah, yah from the press, on August 15th (or certainly soon thereafter), the Iraqis will have a constitution that they wrote themselves. I’m sure it will have some minor things in it that the press can obsess over. But it will be better than that “draft” that got leaked last month.

The upshot will be just like the January Iraqi elections. We are always “doing poorly” in some major way until we aren’t. WWII theatres were already won when Battle of the Bulge and Okinawa took place. At least they were if we kept going.

We haven’t even seen any of the positive effects from the lastest military push in the river valleys. All we have right now is the casuality figures and dim hints of what is going on. A 50/50 US/Iraqi operation of that magnitude is accomplishing a lot we don’t know. It’s also a sign of just how far the Iraq Military has come. Never mind what they will learn merely by doing the operation.

This is why character matters in the president. Now is the time for trust.

Aug 12, 2005 - 11:43 am 15. Thom:

I have to agree that it is difficult to blame the administration, because the MSM (a) refuses to report positive news and (b) distorts simply everything into a negative for Bush.

I do think that the Administration realized this early and has, therefore gone in for a deeper, longer game of bypassing and delegitimizing the MSM. Not by taking an affirmative acts, but rather by allowing the major newspapers and networks to stand naked before the country with their biases and allowing others (including bloggers) to highlight the MSM’s errors and faults.

If an administration official went after Dan Rather for the bogus 60 Minutes II report, it would have been spun in the press wrongly) as a vendetta against Rather by the Bushies. CBS would have been portrayed as David taking on Goliath. Allowing bloggers to take on Rather reversed this, and CBS, rather than Bush, became Goliath battling a thousand Davids.

Aug 12, 2005 - 11:44 am 16. Kyda Sylvester:

I am another who asks respectfully, “What would you suggest they do?”

I’ve never known an administration so relentlessly on message. The media/entertainment complex, academia (where most of the “experts” dwell), Europe, most of the US government and a large percentage of the American people don’t want to hear the message much less deal with its implications. Even the Great Communicator himself had major problems with the first four groups. And many among those groups were highly enamored of Bill Clinton. Just where did that get us? Here, perhaps?

So maybe administration figures could spend more time in internet chat rooms, on radio, among the TV talking heads. Maybe Bush himself could, for instance, hold weekly press conferences. Maybe we could double, treble, quadruple our “diplomatic efforts” abroad. So what? They might as well shout down an empty well.

…the sheer ineptitude of the administration’s public relations has been astounding. I hear/read this a lot. It seldom is elaborated on (to his credit, Mr. Davis does cite ambassadorial ineptitude as an example). Come on, you PR experts. Show us where the administration has gone wrong, what it should have done instead and how that would have led to greater support for its policies. I agree that the Bushies often appear to play the cards too close to the chest (Bush is a poker player after all) and there’s the occasional whiff of “doctor’s demeanor” (the “you don’t need to know what I know, only I need to know; you only need to do do what I tell you to do” syndrome), but they could chatter like magpies all day long, albeit diplomatic and eloquent magpies of course, and it would get them nowhere because most people simply do. not. want. to. hear. it.

Gamel Abdel Nasser once said: The genius of you Americans is that you never make clear-cut stupid moves, only complicated stupid moves which make us wonder at the possibility that there may be something to them we are missing. By that measure, at least, the Bushies would seem to be doing okay.

Aug 12, 2005 - 11:45 am 17. Catherine:

Hey!

Remember back when I was complaining about public diplomacy and folks were giving me a hard time????

Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

ummmm……ok, that’s not right.

I could resist, but I choose not to!

Back to Mrs. Miniver, our trip to London on March 14, 2003 (right? 3 days after Madrid?) was one long lovefest between Britain and America. It was astounding. There were American flags everywhere–EVERYWHERE. Spilling out of every shop, splashed across every young person’s sweatshirt; I even saw one shlumpy guy in his mid-30s, on his way to or back from work, wearing a rumpled black polo shirt with a tiny American flag on the chest, where the Polo insignia would be.

Then there was the play we saw, RAT PACK. Back then I wrote on your blog that RAT PACK couldn’t have been more patriotic if Ronald Reagan himself had written it, and I stand by that today.

Plus which, it was clearly a play about unilateralism, the relationship between America & Britain, and the GWOT. The arc of the play worked out the issue of America’s superior strength and dominance. By the end the play is a celebration of our strength, and of our enduring friendship with Britain (and with Italy, by the way…there were zillions of Italians in the theater). The crowds were giving it standing ovations every single night. People who didn’t normally go to the theater were coming to see RAT PACK, entirely on the strength of word of mouth recommendations. (The reviews had been tepid.)

You simply can’t trust what the BBC has to say about America or the war or anything else. The BBC doesn’t represent the broad mass of people there, just as the NYTIMES doesn’t represent the broad mass of people here.

btw….I tried to pull the Comment I wrote about that trip, but the file is corrupted, so it’s going to take a lot of work. Darn.it.

Aug 12, 2005 - 11:50 am 18. Catherine:

A couple of other things (I’ve thought about this a lot): my neighbors went abroad last summer, I think it was.

They had the same experience I did: everywhere they were welcomed like royalty. One German man said to them, ‘Why would you come here when your country is so beautiful?’

Ed visited Normandy last year, I think it was, and he basically couldn’t get out of shops, people were so thrilled to see him BECAUSE HE WAS AMERICAN.

One man gave him his name and number, and formally invited him to dinner the next trip he made. This is not normal behavior for the French, who are a private people!

Interestingly, Americans are probably doing the same thing. Various French people Ed knows tell him that they continually have the experience of Americans, when they realize they are speaking to someone from France, falling all over themselves to be warm and welcoming.

There’s a whole lot of juice out there, and the BBC doesn’t have a clue.

…..

yikes:

The British middle classes (like many of their counterparts in the US) do not necessarily see American popular culture as an unmitigated force for good

for pete’s sake.

I’m sure the ‘British middle classes’ think American popular culture stinks.

I think American popular culture stinks, too.

But walk down the streets of London and you see a zillion swirling young people wearing American popular culture.

Plus…..I remember counting how many of the plays were either about America, or were written by Americans….there was Rat Pack, the Jerry Springer musical, and at least 2 other famous plays by famous American authors.

London was so Americanized I actually found myself feeling confused at times as to what was English and what was American. When I asked the concierge to recommend a bookstore he sent me to Borders, and he seemed to think that Borders was a British establishment that I, an American, would particularly enjoy. ‘They serve coffee there,’ he said.

I had a moment of disorientation, thinking, ‘Is Borders British? Isn’t it American? Isn’t that why they serve coffee?’

Then when I got out on the street and saw Waterstone’s bookstore, I was again confused. I was thinking…..is Waterstone’s British? (I halfway thought O’Hare Airport invented Waterstone’s….)

My favorite moment, though, was seeing the ‘Saddam display’ in the little shop next to our hotel.

The shop was what I think is called an ‘antiquarian’ shop, selling old maps & books.

In the window they had a framed collage-like arrangement of a photograph of Saddam (as a younger man, I think), a couple of bills of Saddam’s paper money, and, below these things, the words, ‘We got him.’

No mention of Paul Bremer, no mention of America, no mention of Britain. No mention of the war.

Just, ‘We got him.’

We.

Ed and I were both blown away for the entire trip.

My strongest perception, walking down the street: ‘These people have chosen which side they’re on.’

……

That is NOT to say that the British support the war in Iraq or like George Bush or feel much sympathy for Israel.

What we experienced there was much deeper than that.

They were on our side.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:06 pm 19. Catherine:

Last but not least!

I’m on a roll!

One of the British papers ran an interesting article on patriotism a couple of weeks ago, the point being that Americans constantly display the American flag, while the British do not. In Britain, displays of the flag are frowned upon.

That struck me as right, and it also struck me that the huge numbers of American flags all over London were ‘displacements.’ (Hi, Jamie!)

It seems to me that if you’re living in Britain at a time when patriotism is frowned upon, and you’re supposed to be integrating into Europe……and yet you want to fly a flag….the obvious solution is to fly the American flag. Or wear it, or put it on the side of coin purses & mugs, etc.

That perception slightly modifies my perception of roaring America-love in London, but not in any fundamental way.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:10 pm 20. dan cliff:

“The BBC doesn’t represent the broad mass of people there, just as the NYTIMES doesn’t represent the broad mass of people here.”

Yes. And you can say the same thing for a lot of countries and their BBCs and NYTs versus the underlying view.

But a strange thing often happens at the superficial level and a few layers below. The same staunch critics of the NYT with regard to their depiction of American politics and the like take as gospel what the NYT says about how America is viewed by the rest of the world or their characterization of the politics of another country. They turn down the cake and eat it, like gluttons, too.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:11 pm 21. Kevin P:

Roger:

I think both sides of the argument have valid points. The MSM will never cut Bush any slack and the tactic of going around the MSM thru radio and non traditional media is good. Scott McClleland is a fine man but he is out of his league. Even when he is right it comes off as defensive and hesitant. Ari was far better.

The Sheehan case is a joke. He met with her. If he did it again she would come out and say the same things that she is saying now. She has called Bush a liar, and a killer of soldiers to make money. By meeting with her she would just have more ammo and would just get more press attention. If I thought the press would just cover her once after she met with Bush I would say do it. But they have decided to cover her no matter what. She will be on Matthews for the next year saying the exact same crap no matter what Bush does. What she wants Bush to say is “Yes, I am a liar and a murderer, and the war is just a front to reward my rich oil buddies.” If he doesn’t she will say he wouldn’t answer my questions. She doesn’t want answers. In her mind she has them. She wants Bush to bow down to her and tell her that all the military deaths were in vain. He won’t and shouldn’t do it.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:20 pm 22. Studebaker Hawk:

I remember back before the US got involved in Bosnia, there was a Bosnian ambassador to the US who appeared regularly on the various talk shows. I forget his name, but he grew up in New York, spoke English flawlessly and thoroughly understood our idiom and our media. He was young, handsome and charming. Completely telegenic. I am convinced he helped sway public opinion to support our involvement.

As sad as it may be to say, we need that same kind of media presence, young, smooth, attractive.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:24 pm 23. Syl:

I think it’s circumstances that determine what the public discourse is…not our leaders. For all of Blair’s eloquence, he never really addressed the issue of radical Islamists inside Britain and the threat they posed. He just went around the edges.

Until now, after circumstances have forced change as well as forced the discussion about what the changes should be.

There is too much that cannot be said…yet. Unfortunately. I’m sure groups like CAIR would love it if we had an open dialog like what is happening in Britain now. They would shred us and our political leaders to pieces. They’re ready for it. They’re pros.

The MSM is not ready either, still too politically correct to even broach the subject.

Bush’s and our hands are tied.

So let’s let our intellgence agencies deal with it, for now at least. Because the LAST thing we need is open verbal warfare between muslims and the rest of America while everyone tries to figure out what’s going on.

Because the war is more than Iraq, explaining Iraq in its full context brings us to areas we’re not ready to fully explore quite yet.

Even if Bush were as eloquent as Blair, he couldn’t do it either.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:28 pm 24. Keith_Indy:

Catherine – I think your personal anectdotes spell out what many people miss…

They don’t have to like us, or our culture, as long as they’re on our side in this struggle.

Steven Mitchell – “All we have right now is the casuality figures and dim hints of what is going on.”

That is not all we have available to us. I think I have a very good idea of what is going on, and have since before the war started. I don’t view the MSM as a reliable source or indicator of reality. Read the blogs and you’ll find more truth, and competent analysis then you’ll find anywhere in the MSM.

This site has a good view of what all is going on with what’s going on in Western Iraq…

http://billroggio.com/archives/2005/08/operation_quick.php

“This (assault) is part of a pattern of offensives to deny the insurgents sanctuary along the Euphrates River to match ongoing operations along the Tigris” … Cordesman said the coalition’s goals in the Euphrates valley are to make harder for foreign insurgents to infiltrate from Syria and find “stable sanctuary” in the region. Another aim is to put pressure on Sunnis to join the political process, he said. “The political and military effects will play out over months, not days,” he said in a telephone interview.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:33 pm 25. Catherine:

OK, have now read the thread……

I wonder what other readers think, by the way, about what the proportion of our public might be, that truly “gets it?”

I find that an utterly fascinating question.

My guess would be that it’s the same number who voted for Bush last November, plus some portion of those who voted for Kerry.

We probably need to hear from Joseph, Rick Ballard & Richard McEnroe (and any other specifically P.R.-savvy Commenters who’ve surfaced since I’ve been off obsessing on the Math Wars).

I’ve developed a little bit of amateur-expertise at reading polls…..(really amateur)…..and I think the figure you have to look at is how many Americans want to set a date for pulling out the troops. As I recall, the last time I looked, it was somewhere in the 10 % realm (not much higher than that).

Even my own husband, who loathes Bush, and who has now progressed to the point of saying that the Iraqi people were better off before the invasion (if he says it again, I’m Placing a Ban) does not want us to pull out. Nor does he want us to set a date to pull out.

And while I shouldn’t put words in his mouth, I think it’s correct to say that he believes anyone traveling to Pakistan should be kept close tabs on. Close tabs meaning surveilled. He has yet to utter one word against the Patriot Act. And believe me, if he didn’t like the Patriot Act, I would have heard.

He’s also creating a program at NYU to promote a group of moderate Muslims from, I believe, Tunisia. He’s meeting with one of the Bigs at Air France to get funding for their travel.

In other words, he is now creating a role for himself in the GWOT that is the exact opposite of sitting on the sidelines complaining about George Bush. He is doing something positive, something that needs to be done, something that pushes towards helping the good guys win. (How often do we read that we need to be supporting moderate Arabs–something Roger has done, btw. Well, now Ed is doing it, too. He’s not going to get a promotion for teaming up with these guys and giving them a forum; he’s not doing it for his career. He’s doing it because he wants the moderates to win.)

So……what am I saying?

Oh!

I know.

I think the single best thing I’ve read on this subject is Daniel Henninger’s recent column, in the WSJ:

July 7, 2005: the London bombings. In the four weeks since this happened, I have talked about it, on the West Coast and East Coast, with people one could describe as “non-Bush voters.” To a man and woman, they say in so many words that the time has come to “get tough on the terrorists.” One event, London, appears to have caused an internal reassessment among some Americans formerly ambivalent about the war on terror.

Reality Happens

I think it’s fair to say that here in New York we are simply waiting for the subway to explode. I know I am. Again, I shouldn’t speak for my husband, but I’m positive he is, too.

Our only question, in this house, is: Will Ed be on the train when it gets hit?

So……I’m making a semi-educated guess that a large majority of people in the U.S. ‘get it.’

Does that cause them to support the war in Iraq, or think it was a good idea? No. Not necessarily.

…….

As to communication & publicity, I’ve always thought the Bushies were lousy at it. I think I remember Joseph once saying that the Bushies had a ‘play-to-the-base’ concept (dim memory) which I think is wrong when it comes to war.

Bush also seems to have a poker approach–remember that terrific essay about what a great poker player he was in B-school?

Certainly, he has a strong propensity for secrecy, which I think is almost invariably bad. Having been on the receiving end of a secretive executive myself, I can tell you that the effects are terrifically corrosive.

All that said, I have no idea how they should be handling Communications. I wish I did, because it’s a riveting subject.

OK, back to work.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:43 pm 26. Catherine:

The same staunch critics of the NYT with regard to their depiction of American politics and the like take as gospel what the NYT says about how America is viewed by the rest of the world or their characterization of the politics of another country.

I do it myself!

And I know better!

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:45 pm 27. Catherine:

Syl

Because the war is more than Iraq, explaining Iraq in its full context brings us to areas we’re not ready to fully explore quite yet.

Yes, I think that’s another factor; there’s so much that still can’t be said, and for good reason.

Studebaker Hawk

He was young, handsome and charming. Completely telegenic. I am convinced he helped sway public opinion to support our involvement.

RIGHT!

This is the kind of thing I don’t think of, because I’m just not well-versed in political communication.

What you’re talking about is know in the trade, I believe, as an Attractive Surrogate.

Probably one thing the administration needs is more of these folks: more Attractive Surrogates.

I’m not watching TV anymore. Who’s speaking for Iraq these days?

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:50 pm 28. Rick Ballard:

Dan Cliff,

A truly excellent point. A number of posters here (and perhaps Roger) still use the Copperhead MSM as a referrant. If the NYT or al-WaPo haven’t been convinced then the administration isn’t getting the message out. If AP buys a poll and gets the results it ordered then it’s W’s fault because he didn’t ‘convince’ enough people. A crystal clear example of this are polls showing ‘dissatisfaction’ with the economy. The economy has been growing at a sustainable rate since the 9/11 dip and I am unaware of any negative indicators, yet people are dissatisfied. Does it take unsustainable growth to satisfy them – or just honest reporting by the Copperhead press?

W could declaim like Demosthenes while strolling on the Refecting Pool and the headlines would read “Omniscient Idiot Proves Unable to Wade”.

It would be nice if our public diplomacy was brilliant enough to convince the Copperheads – buts it’s really not necessary to do so. They don’t deserve to have any additional effort expended upon them.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:51 pm 29. Jamie Irons:

Hi, Catherine!

As usual, I feel better after reading what you’ve said.

Your response to my question about how many Americans “get it” was exceedingly helpful.

Kudos* to Ed for what he is doing.

Jamie Irons

*Which, as I never tire of pointing out, tiresome pedant that I am, is a singular third declension Greek noun meaning something like glory, renown, and is definitely not “more than one kudo,” whatever a kudo might be.

Aug 12, 2005 - 12:55 pm 30. Studebaker Hawk:

Here’s who I was talking about:

Muhamed Sacirbey was born in Sarajevo in 1956 but left in 1963 with his parents for Turkey and North Africa. Four years later, in 1967, he moved to the U.S. Describing himself as an “all-American boy,” who toyed with the idea of West Point and passed up Harvard and Yale to take a football scholarship at Tulane University, he never forgot his origins.

He struck me as intelligent, charismatic, and I believe very persuasive. He never fumbled over words, was always prepared, was courteous even toward detractors.

I remember being at a party hosted by the Japanese ambassador in D.C. and speaking to the ambasssador contrasting Mr. Sacirbey to the Japanese spokepeople who were not fluent in English, stumbled often for words, didn’t understand the idiom and ultimately failed to impress.

Aug 12, 2005 - 1:08 pm 31. Coisty:

Catherine – But walk down the streets of London and you see a zillion swirling young people wearing American popular culture.

That’s totally meaningless. I worked with people in N Ireland who were into American pop culture but were anti-American – including an out and out communist who supported the USSR in the Cold War. Also, many of these same people will wear Yankees baseball caps and apparel with the American flag but it’s just a fashion thing. I know Irish Catholics who supported IRA attacks on English civilians yet they followed English football and pop culture religiously.

If anything US pop culture hurts the image of your country. I think it was Michael Medved who said that years ago (pre 60s?) foreigners watched American movies and wanted to emulate Americans or even move to the US. Today they watch American movies and are revolted by what they see and glad they don’t live there. Many of the most popular Americans in Europe – Johnny Depp, Michael Moore, rap stars, etc – encourage Europeans to despise the US as a nation and Americans as human beings. When they watch The Simpsons or Friends they may be entertained but they also laughing at you. Many Europeans also see US pop culture as completely distinct from the Americans who go to church and vote Republican.

BTW are you sure those US flags weren’t tourist related. I recall seeing an American flag at some street festival in the centre of London and it was clearly aimed at attracting tourists and their money.

Aug 12, 2005 - 1:23 pm 32. Steven Mitchell:

I said – “All we have right now is the casuality figures and dim hints of what is going on.”

Keith Indy replied – “That is not all we have available to us. I think I have a very good idea of what is going on, and have since before the war started. I don’t view the MSM as a reliable source or indicator of reality. Read the blogs and you’ll find more truth, and competent analysis then you’ll find anywhere in the MSM.”

Exactly. That “we” in my quote above was a poorly chosen pronoun with dubious antecendents. I have a pretty good idea of what is really going on as well–because I read those same blogs. What we don’t have is anything approaching the kind of iron-clad certainty that the MSM needs before they will admit that they are wrong–er, make that change the subject because they have been proven wrong. The fall of Baghdad in 3 weeks was one such moment. The January elections are another. The constitution will be yet another.

It’s useless to expect certain idiots (those of the Dan Rather stripe) to ever change. It’s not useless to remember that we only have to wait for events to overtake them.

Aug 12, 2005 - 1:33 pm 33. Coisty:

Muhamed Sacirbey was the effective spokesman for the Muslim government of Bosnia. He was effective because he managed to con Americans into thinking the so-called Bosniaks were innocent victims of the big bad Serbs and that Bosnian Muslims were secular. They may be mostly secular but their ties to the Muslim world were and still are strong and if I’m not mistaken the government in Sarajevo also gave Osama Bin Laden a passport. Many foreigners have watched pro-Israel spokesmen with American accents effectively win US support for Israel and emulated that tactic for their own sectarian causes.

Speaking of the former Yugoslavia I was still living in the UK when Clinton launched his disgraceful assault on Serbia. Anti-American sentiment in Europe was very strong during that campaign. I recall many British people calling into a BBC radio programme mentioning the ‘genocide of the Indians,’ and Hiroshima in an attempt to show the US was no better than Serbia. There were anti-American riots all over Europe but for some reason Democrats don’t remember them.

Aug 12, 2005 - 1:36 pm 34. dan cliff:

Studebaker Hawk,

But still their English was ten times better than their counterparts Japanese. Believe me. (And, to continue on my point that the lack of elegance is often a useful tool, at times the U.S.-Japan relations has prospered precisely because the language gap made everything simple and straightforward. Nods, winks, bows, handshakes and small talk about the weather can be a diplomatic blessing. Everything else in writing. I personally know a few Japanese whose spoken English is quite good, but would never let you know it, especially while on assignment over there. I also have a friend who loves getting on the trains in Japan, opening up an english newspaper, smiling the smile of a foreigner completely lost, and hearing the most incredible conversation in Japanese (a language he knows quite well.)

Aug 12, 2005 - 1:39 pm 35. Sandy P:

Roger, it’s not really depressing, it’s the way it’s always been.

As I’ve written before, I spent about 3 years in The Independent’s now-defunct chat room and it was very enlightening.

Some were once again discussing why they hate us and a poster wrote that his dad disliked us because we took away his birthright.

It never occurred to me as long as I’ve been interested in the world that we did that, and discussed it w/my dad.

His first response? “Of course we did.” I still didn’t get it, but think about it.

“The world” has never really liked us and never will until we’re as miserable as they are and admit their way is the correct way, forget this individualism, gun rights, free speech, actually voting for people, this ground-up electoral process instead of our elite, educated elected betters telling us what we need, how to live, limiting our choices – making our choices for US, yada, yada, yada.

I’ve only started reading Philippe Roger’s (?){still buried in a moving box somewhere} French Anti-Americanism, but it started right out of the box when we were colonies, in the mid-to-late 1600s. (all footnoted) Everything on this continent was smaller, stupider, etc, etc., etc. It hasn’t —THEY haven’t changed. And then we’ve got the mixing of the races, cajuns, oy.

Mutated monarchy, unelected 1, unelected brusselsprouts, same old, same old.

Aug 12, 2005 - 2:04 pm 36. Coisty:

Roger is right, US spokesmen are not doing a good job. Sure some people can’t be convinced but many more can and it would help if there were at least some good speakers in the Bush White House. US military spokesmen are also pathetic compared to those of other nations especially the UK. They sound like they never went to school. They announce the commencement of hostilities (ie death and destruction) by crying “it’s hammer time” like Steven Seagal in some Hollywood B movie. The leftist press drools at such moments.

Also, they don’t seem to have much knowledge of the outside world. There’s nothing wrong with being parochial, we all are in our own ways (and wouldn’t it be boring if we were all the same?), but when you want the rest of the world on your side you should at least hire people who aren’t going to alienate potential friends.

A recent example of Bush making a mess of things was when he went to the British Embassy to express condolences. He turned to the cameras and said he’d like to express sympathy in behalf of “our great nation”. Why use such a moment, with live UK TV coverage, to boast about how great the US is? No leader I can think of would use such an occasion to throw in such a gratuitous remark. Americans might think remarks like this are suitable but it sounds moronic and disrespectful to foreigners and it annoys us unnecessarily.

Aug 12, 2005 - 2:05 pm 37. Studebaker Hawk:

My point was that the telegenic nature and verbal skills of Mr. Sacirbey were serious, persuasive tools given the nature of modern media communications. The Bush administration could use those types of skills, in the US and abroad.

Perhaps it’s unrealistic given that ambassador positions are political, but having the ability to speak the language of the host country should be a requirement.

Aug 12, 2005 - 2:07 pm 38. TedM:

At the risk of being jumped on by my old friends in here, let me say what I have said in certain places for some years now. George Bush has changed the course of the history of the 21st century for the better. BUT, he is an embarassment as a speaker. Part of the British dislike of him is based on their watching him speak. He is just plain bad. Compare him with the recent press conferences of Tony Blair. How many of us wished the Pres Bush had the skills of Blair in speaking off the cuff in response to loaded press questions.

History had blessed us and the UK with charismatic leaders in the past. We are not so fortunate now. And that is a serious problem.

Catherine, I have family in London and travel there frequently. The Brits like us as individuals, but their loathing of our President is unprecedented. Even those who support the idea of fighting Islamists and recognize what the war against humanity is all about, think that he is a dope. They listen to his halting speech and syntax and cannot believe that we could elect someone like that. I have long since given up arguing facts with these people.

Pres. Bush’s inability to speak clearly about the “enemy” and to rally the nation loses him support as people weary of the “bad” news.

Like Jamie, I have been discouraged for a long time. OBL is right. The US does not have the stomach for a long drawn out war.You all know how the media focuses on negatives. Any nation which counts casualties on the fingers of their hand is doomed to lose to an enemy willing to die for their cause.

On Roger’s site and others like it, we spent an inordinate amount of time defending ourselves and our nation against all sorts of nonsensical issues. Who really cares about Sheehan or Halliburton or any of the other nonsense. As Joseph used to write, it is the death of a thousand cuts. While we are countering the bull, we have not focused on the real issue. Islamic Jihadism.

End of rant. Thank you all.

Aug 12, 2005 - 2:13 pm 39. dan cliff:

Believe me, at least as far as Japan is concerned, it is best the American Ambassador and most of the staff are verbally incompetent. As they famously are. Others make our case for us, when needed, and understand how to do it. A nice speech now and then is plenty. America’s footprint is big enough as is. What does matter is if the Amb., like Mondale did, commits a gross policy faux pas. I’m not saying men and women like Sacirbey aren’t a blessing and useful, but there are many ways to get the job done. The U.S. guided by the incompetent Bush (like Reagan) before him has never had better relations with Japan and many other countries. And those like France and Germany are coming around, Chirac and Schroeder are losing ground not gaining. I find the general thrust of this thread, as presented by our host, as so much whining and not very connected to reality (except as the NYT would have you believe). Welcome to the world 9/11 Democrats. Discouraged? Get used to it and buckle-up. Deeds are all that matters.

Coisty,

The people with the so-called “knowledge” of the rest of the world are usually the worst. Juan Coles and his ilk. Foot in the mouth Bush is a blessing. As an American who has lived my whole adult life abroad, give me a Reagan and Bush anytime. Americans are supposed to swagger and say stupid things. Grunt and wave flags. Get the idiotic Left in an uproar. Make the studied abroad at Columbia U. types scream and holler. When they don’t is when things don’t go well and living abroad as an American is most difficult. America is about deeds not words and the world knows it and always has. If we want a sycophant we look to France. America: Get the job done.

Aug 12, 2005 - 2:48 pm 40. Pat Curley:

I suspect that any anti-American sentiment in England is like the Rio Grande–wide but not very deep. Certainly I found all the Brits I met over there (admittedly a long time ago) very friendly to an obvious Yank.

What is happening over there is the same that is happening over here if the polls are to be believed. The major media grind slowly, but they just keep on grinding, and eventually they wear people down. Richard Clarke, Joe Wilson, Max Cleland, Cindy Sheehan… it’s like Chinese water torture.

Aug 12, 2005 - 2:49 pm 41. Keith_Indy:

Coisty – “When they watch The Simpsons or Friends they may be entertained but they also laughing at you. Many Europeans also see US pop culture as completely distinct from the Americans who go to church and vote Republican.”

If you can’t laugh at yourselves you’re taking yourselves to darn seriously. I laugh at these interpretations and exaggerations of our culture. But I also know that they are not that accurate an expression of who we are.

And you should really start telling people these aren’t “American” movies, they’re Hollywood movies. Big difference. Very big difference. I think they stopped being American movies sometime in the 60’s.

“Americans might think remarks like this are suitable but it sounds moronic and disrespectful to foreigners and it annoys us unnecessarily. ”

You’re just jealous we live in such a great country.

Just kidding, a little ol’ American sarcasm and smart-assedness.

I find it suprising that so much is based in the manner in which people speak. Maybe it’s because I only speak Americanized English.

Steven – glad you’re on the same page, but the point stands, if we are able to find the truth, how come the MSM doesn’t find it fit to print.

Aug 12, 2005 - 3:01 pm 42. Keith_Indy:

dan – “Deeds are all that matters.”

Damn straight. I’m sick and tired of all the people who are “concerned” with X issue, but wont get off their duff to do something about it. Even if it’s not the perfect thing to do about it, doing something (other than whining) is usually better than doing nothing.

“Americans are supposed to swagger and say stupid things. Grunt and wave flags.”

You forgot “and fire guns in the air…”

Aug 12, 2005 - 3:06 pm 43. Rick Ballard:

“how come the MSM doesn’t find it fit to print.”

‘Cause they’re on the other side?

Like they’ve been since I was a wee laddie, lo those many years ago?

Aug 12, 2005 - 3:07 pm 44. dan cliff:

What has all of Blair’s eloquence gained him? Did he do better in his last election than Bush in his? Is he hated by the far Left any less? Is he steadier than Bush? Do his troops consider him a better leader? History has blessed us with charismatic leaders, true. But usually as seen through the lense of history. I remind you of how the Gettysburg Address was panned by all the big newspapers and how Lincoln was considered less than able to get the job done rhetorically. After the War was won Churchill was thrown out on his butt. 1945. For all his eloquence. Bush is doing pretty well. On message. Doesn’t play the media games. Says what he means and does what he says. By chance, if he were more eloquent, and sometimes he is, good advice might be to tell him to dumb it down. Like an ace up your sleeve that can be used when really necessary. At the very least his political skills, whatever they may be, has made me and many others, including many foreigners and even countries, part with money and time and blood and toil, whole-heartedly. Not bad as far as rhetoric goes, no?

You forgot “and fire guns in the air…” Yes, I did.

Aug 12, 2005 - 3:15 pm 45. Steven Mitchell:

‘You forgot “and fire guns in the air…” ‘

Maybe that’s why the regular Joe Afghan or Iraqi seem to get along with us so well?

Rick is correct about the MSM. Except that I’ll grant them this much–even if they weren’t on the other side, they’d have a hard time explaining this stuff. They aren’t that bright for the most part. And people that read them blindly aren’t much better. That’s a classic case of the blind leading the blind. Big elections and major public events, OTOH, are so easy that sometimes even real reporters can handle them moderately well.

Some people would rather spend all of their time sounding plausible and eloquent while they speak drivel. It mortally offends such when an “uneducated” bumpkin actually zeroes in on the solution to an issue. It calls into value the priorities and depth of the drivel speaker’s education–or even intelligence and priorities.

Some one silly enough to value style over substance might even entertain the notion that, say, Hollywood produced stuff represents real America. So of course they will be offended by the way Bush speaks. It will never cross their minds that Bush does *communicate* very well. In fact, he communicates so well that sometimes even his blunders contain unheralded truths. “Let freedom reign”. Indeed.

If Bush was auditioning for ambassador to France or the latest role on Broadway or even something as silly as a TV anchor job–then harping on his speech *style* would be relevant. As it is, we are rarely blessed with leaders of such vision and integrity and political courage. It seems rather churlish to demand more.

As for spokespersons for the administration, there is *nothing* that they could do that would be half as good as what the responsible part of the blogosphere does not already do. If we had a Clinton-type (with, however, integrity and discreteness) that could lead the press corp on a merry chase to nowhere, it would be nice. I don’t know of anyone that fits that bill.

Aug 12, 2005 - 3:32 pm 46. dan cliff:

I do admit I have never been able to understand the why of Ari and Scott. The children of the press corps need an old hand, greying and stern, basso profundo, to keep them in line. Not another child they can gang up on at recess. Does Fred Thompson have a twin?

Aug 12, 2005 - 3:45 pm 47. Doug S.:

I can see both sides of the argument in this thread, and will not try to come down hard on one side or the other. I haven’t been overseas in 15 years, and cannot comment on the actual depth of anti-Americanism these days. But something Keith_Indy said way upthread caught my attention, about making better PR use of those who have actually been in Iraq and can make, from personal experience, a compelling case on behalf of what we’re doing over there. In WWII, we made use of war heroes to sell war bondsÔøΩ which, of course, meant keeping up morale on the home front as well as raising money. We pulled at least a couple of our top fighter aces out of the front lines for that purpose. If we did that now, yes, the Copperhead MSM would no doubt sneer at it as propoganda, but I suspect it would helpÔøΩ to have returning veterans speak to community groups, schools, etc. Local media would be more inclined to play the ‘hometown hero’ angle rather than the ‘Bush/Rove propoganda machine’ angle that the national press would take.

All of which ties into something that Colonel Bay has been saying recentlyÔøΩ that the Administration is making a big mistake by not mobilizing the home front and shifting gears into a more wholehearted war effort. Maybe it is a mistake not to have war bond rallies and genuine heroes telling us what’s going on.

Aug 12, 2005 - 3:53 pm 48. Kevin P:

Roger;

I think we need to seperate the communications wing of the White House and the President. The Press Secretary and the White House spokesman should be great communicators because it is a major part of their job. I hate to pick on Scott because I am sure he is a nice guy but he has got to go.

President Bush is not a good speaker, there is no other way to put it. But this is where people need to drop the need for pleasant sounds and concentrate on deeds and actions. Clinton was and is a wonderfull speaker. Beautifull at times. Untill you look at what he does and then the words are nothing more then cotton candy. I wish that Bush was a smooth speaker. He isn’t and I doubt that he ever will be. And his policy would be helped if he was. But this is not going to happen.

Being polished in speech and debate is a great political tool. But as far as the left and the MSM it would make no difference. Reagan could deliver a speech as well as anyone but the press portrayed him as a dolt and so did much of Europe.( I did too and some of his gaffs were some of my primary attack points against him because my policy arguments were so shallow) Comparing Bush to Blair is tough because of the years years of Question time and Parliment debate has honed his skills. I am not comparing Bush to Lincoln but he was called the “original ape” and his speaking voice was thin and reedy. Old Abe would have bombed in the age of telivision. Truman was considered a moron and a dolt because of his Missouri twang and non-east coast vocabulary.

In the end I would prefer a President who was smoother on the ear but I will trade the ability to come off good on the tube for someone who has spine and convictions.

Aug 12, 2005 - 3:54 pm 49. Clive Davis:

Thanks for the link, Roger. This has been a really interesting discussion.

I didn’t mean to imply that the Bush administration can single-handedly overturn two centuries of foreign condescension. But I do think America could improve its image with just a small improvement in public diplomacy. The one example I gave in my piece – which didn’t appear in the final version – was the decision not to ratify the Kyoto Treaty. I can’t tell you how much damage that caused over here. Of course, the irony is that the president probably made the right call. Unfortunately, he didn’t bother to explain his reasoning to the world audience, which was an absolute gift to his critics. Talking to all sorts of non-media people in the aftermath of 9/11, I was struck by how many of them – about 80 per cent – opened the conversation with “Yes, the attacks were terrible. But what about Kyoto…?”

Some readers have e-mailed me to say that the US shouldn’t try to address this problem because it’s inevitable that the world’s only superpower will attract envy and hostility. I see their point, but I don’t think it’s tenable in an age where the media are all-powerful. I ran a quotation by Michael Novak on my blog today. It sums up my feelings:

“For many generations, the practical superiority of democratic capitalism was as evident as the commercial proverb ‘Build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door.’ The superiority of practical men to theoretical men seemed verified by history. But there is another proverb, equally potent: ‘Without vision, the people perish.’ Furthermore, in a world of instantaneous, universal mass communications, the balance of power has now shifted. Ideas, always a part of reality, have today acquired power greater than that of reality. One of the most astonishing characteristics of our age is that ideas, even false and unworkable ideas, even ideas which are no longer believed in by their official guardians, rule the affairs of men and run roughshod over stubborn facts.”

Aug 12, 2005 - 4:07 pm 50. Coisty:

dan cliff – The people with the so-called “knowledge” of the rest of the world are usually the worst. Juan Coles and his ilk.

I know what you mean. I’ve met some of these Americans in Europe and they are worse than the jingo crowd, who are at least real. But surely there are plenty of worldly American patriots who could be useful for PR.

Incidentally, the anti-American Americans are not as worldly as they like to think and their put-downs of their own country won’t endear them to too many Europeans. The French, British, and other Europeans may not be extroverted flagwavers but they are patriotic in other ways. Most are determined to preserve their culture and are more likely to care about their roots than most Americans I’ve met. We may run down our own country when we are amongst ourselves but you are unlikely to hear us doing so when we are with foreigners. That would be like insulting your mother to strangers. Those “sophisticated” Americans who sit in a bar in Europe talking like Michael Moore about the US may please some Europeans but they won’t be respected or trusted.

Aug 12, 2005 - 4:07 pm 51. Soldier's Dad:

A war is like a kitchen remodeling project from hell. Once you have ripped out the sink, there will be no consoling the wife until every last detail is finished. Nothing will go as planned, the cabinets show up a week late, the countertop has to be returned because it is the wrong color. The plumber hurt his back and won’t be along for a month. The wife endlessly demands to know a “date certain” when she can have a dinner party. Every set back will be blamed on the husbands incompetence.

Expecting the wife to take this all in stride and not frequently complain that it should have been left alone in the first place is something no “thinking husband” would ever do.

Iraq is the same, took down the existing regime in record time. The Iraqi Army had to be returned because it didn’t fit the “democratic society” color scheme. The New Iraqi Army has arrived but installation is taking longer than planned. The border has more leaks than a “soaker hose”. The press and public endlessly demand a “date certain” when the “New Iraq” will be finished. Every delay and setback will be seen as complete failure and blamed on the President.

Bush knows that public sentiment will change when the “New Iraq” is finished. He just needs to keep the public from going completely south on him in the meantime, just as the husband keeps the wife from filing for divorce during the kitchen renovation project.

Aug 12, 2005 - 4:19 pm 52. Jamie Irons:

Let me back off a bit from my complaint about Bush’s speaking abilities; perhaps I am rightly accused of churlishness in asking for more than a stiff spine and consistency, which I agree he is (for the most part) exhibiting. And he has his job at perhaps the worst time of any president in sixty years or more. He has visibly aged. (I am sensitive to this, being just a few months younger than the pres and having gone to college with him!)

But does that justify the fact that virtually nobody in the Administration — no, in the whole government, in any branch or on any side of the aisle, can seem to come out and speak honestly and coherently about what we are up against? No Republican, certainly no Democrat, seems willing or able to come forward and speak eloquently and forcefully.*

I see this as a problem. Sorry.

Jamie Irons

No, wait. There was one. Zell Miller. He seems to have disappeared. Perhaps he was an embarrassment to the rest.

The exception that proves the rule.

Aug 12, 2005 - 4:24 pm 53. Coisty:

Clive Davis:

Kyoto is a perfect example of how poor Bush is at PR. I was living in the UK at the time and I was convinced Kyoto was bad by articles in newspapers like The Times suggesting that Kyoto was impractical, unfair to successful countries with backdoor redistribution of wealth, and backed by dubious science. To me it was a political protocol with little to do with the environment. Yet when Bush was asked why the US withdrew instead of making the same arguments that had been in the press he just stood their smirking and said it would cost jobs. He made no effort at all to explain what was wrong with the protocol and so the pro-Kyoto crowd (already dominant in the European media) won the argument easily.

Aug 12, 2005 - 4:27 pm 54. Kevin P:

Jamie and Coisty:

You are correct about the PR people Bush has surrounded himself with. Mehlman does a decent job but he tends to focus on non-Iraq issues. But I have a suggestion for White House roving War counter propaganda chief. His views on other matters would ranckle the Administartion but if he was confined to the war he would dominate the opposition. ……….Christopher Hitchens. Bush needs someone who will not be so passive and is willing to tear and shred.

Aug 12, 2005 - 4:50 pm 55. dan cliff:

Coisty,

Good points. I think most of us “worldly American patriot” types, for appearance’s sake I’ll include myself at the bottom of that barrel, choose to live abroad for a variety of reasons and do our work quietly behind the scenes correcting the most blatant kinds of misconceptions. Making common cause with those in the country we reside whose well intentioned leaders and “patriots” are also painted with a broad Gramscian-brush by their media. It’s a we are all in the same boat kind of thing. Too, I’m an ugly American I happily admit, but the sophisticated Americans you so well describe are much uglier. I agree. Plus they have no idea how many laugh and mock them. Me and my brethren at least have good enough sense to know why we are being laughed at and find great pleasure in playing along. Which is why I am hopeful and one of the reasons I think the whole America is losing the p.r. game is a bit over-stated; though with great pleasure I do concede most every point Mr. Clive Davis has made, as I am very fond of his writing and respect him greatly. And yes, in Japan too, the day after the attacks, one often heard the media push the “Yes, the attacks were terrible. But what about Kyoto…?” meme. Though anyone able to say that and believe it, surely would find something else as or more silly to say in its place, if by chance Bush had done a better job explaining his position. No matter what, “Yes, the attacks were terrible. But what about….” was going to be said! Not much you can do really. Worrying about those who say things like that is in a way giving them the audience they don’t deserve. At most a simple roll of the eyes suffices, no? Bush is part of a long line of a very American rhetorical tradition comprising of rolling the eyes and ignoring those not deserving a reply and when necessary speaking simply and without eloquence. (Though the words read well. In fact,) Washington not Monroe, Teddy not Franklin, Ike not Adlai, Reagan not Cuomo, Bush not Clinton. I’d go so far as to say Lincoln and the master stylist Grant (read those memoirs). It’s populism with a twist. Anti-demagogic! Very American indeed.

Aug 12, 2005 - 4:53 pm 56. Rick Ballard:

Jamie,

Why start a cattle drive when there’s good grass and plenty of water on the range? We’re 14 1/2 months from an election, the country is split about 33,33,34 and the 34 doesn’t have (and never has had) more than a 90 day horizon. Starting to lay out salt and fodder this early is just a waste of time and money. Besides, it could put the cattle off their feed and cause problems at the feed lot next summer.

This isn’t ‘74, the Dems don’t have the legislature and can’t betray the Iraqis and we’ll be drawing down forces significantly by next summer. The coalition has held together very well and the rest of the furriners (a few ME countries excepted) have been bribed or threatened into at least acquiesence.

The terror threat might be about the same as last summer but one should consider that at any given moment there are 15,000 operators – whom we never hear about (thank goodness) actively pursuing terrorists around the world. That doesn’t mean we won’t wake up to horror tomorrow but good rhetoric can’t cure that either.

It would be nice to have silver tongued spokesmen out providing wondrous sound bites every day but – to what end? To engender fear and conern about the seriousness of the problem? To point out those 15,000 working in the shadows? To illuminate the fact that we are bribing and threatening the Iraqis to get off their butts and show some initiative in taking charge of their own destiny?

That would just be fodder for the Copperheads. They’re fat enough and have a sufficiency of venom as it is.

Aug 12, 2005 - 4:54 pm 57. Steven Mitchell:

*snort* Why exactly is it the American president’s job to convince the European citizenry that Kyoto is a bad idea? Think about what you are saying! “Everytime some wacko at the UN gets a program going that makes no sense, Dad has to come out and set the record straight, while making us all feel good about ourselves at the same time.”

The 98-0 Senate vote ought to have got the relevant facts across to other world leaders. What they do with this info is their problem.

No, that dog won’t hunt. It’s not Bush’s job to educate those who refuse to learn. I think it speaks well of his understanding of human nature that he does not try.

Aug 12, 2005 - 4:57 pm 58. TedM:

Steve,

Good point about the Senate vote on Kyoto during the Clinton presidency. Kyoto was dead before bush was sworn in, but who knows that aside from some of the blogospherites? Only on Fox did I hear reference to that vote. As far as the US public is concerned, Bush killed it.

The comment above about Bush saying in an offhand comment that it would cost jobs is exactly right.

There should have been a refutation of the science and how it would cost jobs here.

Someone also mentioned Scott’s inadequacy. I totally agree with that.

Aug 12, 2005 - 5:16 pm 59. dan cliff:

“But does that justify the fact that virtually nobody in the Administration — no, in the whole government, in any branch or on any side of the aisle, can seem to come out and speak honestly and coherently about what we are up against?” But somehow many of us know, honestly and coherently, exactly what we are up against. And spend hours upon hours reminding ourselves and defending those leaders who we sense also get it. How has that happened? Somehow what you say isn’t happening has happened and is continuing to happen. Furthermore, that it isn’t happening as you may wish it to happen has only made you and many others more determined than ever to argue and fight for what needs to happen. How this has happened I am not sure. But perhaps Bush’s rhetoric and the skills of our politicians are not nearly as bad as some of us would like to believe. Jamie, you seem to me downright motivated and taking responsibility.

Aug 12, 2005 - 5:18 pm 60. richard mcenroe:

Catherine — First off, write off the mainstream media. Ain’t Gonna Happen. Even when they are forced to cover positive developmentns out of Iraq, they play the Even Though game. “Iraqis turned out in long lines to vote, Even Though photographs from Abu Ghraib continue to ciculate…”

This poor sick Sheehan woman will be the ultimate Even Though card for a couple of weeks, until media saturation and her own Mooresque pronouncements use her up.

Second, there is a large part of the population that doesn’t get it and won’t try. There’s one arrested infant across the street who has one sign: “Bush: still wrong” Elections in Afghanistan? “Bush: still wrong” Saddam Caught? “Bush: still wrong” Libya gives up its WMD’s “Bush: still wrong”… it’s the politics of a three-year-old: “Bush: still wrong” *stamp*stamp*stamp*

I don’t march to persuade those people. I march to communicate with the people who can listen and to support the people in the community who agree with me but can’t mention it publicly at work or home for fear of provoking tantrums.

(And if I CAN politely provoke the folks across the street to tantrums, so much the better. The folks who agree with their tantrum ain’t gonna listen to me anyway and the folks who might will be turned off by their behavior…)

Bush is right not to chase the approval of these people, he won’t get it. He’s right to find other ways of getting his message out, and if that means the blogs do the heavy lifting, fine. That’s what grass roots support is all about.

Aug 12, 2005 - 5:26 pm 61. Catherine:

BTW are you sure those US flags weren’t tourist related. I recall seeing an American flag at some street festival in the centre of London and it was clearly aimed at attracting tourists and their money.

Believe it or not, I am sure.

Gosh, I’m afraid I can’t boil the experience down well enough to do it justice (and not eat up all of the thread).

The thing about our trip was that we went to London literally 2 or 3 days after the Madrid bombings. Everyone was very, very, very alert, distraught, and aware that they were next in line.

And the constant message we were given, everywhere we went, was: Glad to see you.

Not just, Glad to see you as individuals.

Glad to see you Americans.

(I wish I had my reception at customs on tape. I was dazed going through, and when the Customs official realized I had Madrid on my mind he turned into everyone’s image of the Perfect Stoic Brit. He wrapped up his questions and swept me through; basically, he took care of me. That’s really what it was.)

Our relationship with Britain is profound and permanent; I can’t imagine anything that could un-do it.

We really need a ‘psychoanalysis’ of countries, of the way countries relate to one another. I’m coming to think whole countries have an unconscious, too; an unconscious, and country-wide defense mechanisms.

One thing I see played out amongst & between countries is the truth that you can always get mad at your mom or dad; it’s safe. They have to love you no matter what you do.

Britain is going to love us no matter what we do, and we are going to love them no matter what they do…..so it’s safe for them to blast us, & us to blast them.

As to the Brits disliking George Bush, I suspect there’s more to the story there, too. Again, I’m thinking about the musical, RAT PACK. It was so positive about America that the characters were making affectionate jokes about the Ku Klux Klan.

So I suspect there’s some very well masked affection for W. lurking inside the British soul. Once he’s been out of office a couple hundred years, they’ll probably discover their true feelings.

Jamieoff-topic: I LOVE the “Chase me Ladies” blog. It’s amazing! Incredible! (You posted a link a little while back.)

Writing my response to you I had my usual Roger-Simon-epiphany. I hadn’t, until that moment, realized that Ed had crossed over from critic to actor–at least, not consciously.

That’s an insight it’s good for me to have consciously.

I have to find out more about the Muslims he’s working with. They were government officials in Tunisia, I think; they’re now too radical (i.e. moderate) to be able to serve in government. I have to assume their lives are in danger; I also have to assume that this fact hasn’t crossed Ed’s mind. (And yes: good for him.)

Of course, I don’t know anything about Tunisia…..

Anyway, thank you!

Soldier’s Dad Incredible!

War is like remodeling your kitchen!

It’s TRUE!!!!!

I’m writing that down.

Aug 12, 2005 - 5:29 pm 62. TedM:

In a recent press conference Blair named the enemy.and that is something we need to do.Blair came right out and said that if you want to come to Britain and live there you can’t preach your hatred of their society. And if you did, Britain would kick you out.

The subway bombers were a miniature 9/11 for Britain. It was their wake up call. And there is a growing change in public opinion and editorial comments in the UK. Political correctness is no longer the order of the day. Security has trumped it.

Aug 12, 2005 - 5:42 pm 63. Morgan:

Soldier’s Dad:

Your analogy made me laugh out loud. Been there.

And on the money, too.

I think that the dichotomy that is developing (Bush’s speaking ability is the critical thing vs. Bush’s speaking ability is irrelevant) is simple rhetorical polarization.

Aug 12, 2005 - 5:44 pm 64. AST:

I just saw somewhere Wolcott’s latest slam at Roger. I continue to marvel at the way so many people in this country have shaken off the effects of 9/11 and gone back to their old mindsets of fearing Republicans more than Al Qaeda.

I sometimes think that we are like people on a raft drifting toward a waterfall, and some of us only want to fight over who mans the tiller. Britain and the rest of Europe seem to be having the same problems on their own rafts.

Aug 12, 2005 - 5:59 pm 65. Steven Mitchell:

“I think that the dichotomy that is developing (Bush’s speaking ability is the critical thing vs. Bush’s speaking ability is irrelevant) is simple rhetorical polarization.”

That may be true, but I don’t fit either camp. Bush’s speaking ability is relevant, but his speaking *style* is not. He communicates what he means very well. For that matter, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice–they all have some of that. Thus we manage to figure some of this out, as Dan Cliff said.

This is why Kyoto is just about the worst example someone could pick of Americans and Bush alienating everyone else.

I’m sure that when Clinton signed Kyoto, whatever he said gave all the right people the warm fuzzies. I’m equally sure it was about as accurate as you can expect out of someone in full pander mode. Meanwhile, Kyoto was so bad that even an intellectual heavyweight like Barbara Boxer could figure it out. If ever there was a poster child for style over substance, that signing was it.

So Bush comes along during the Kyoto game. Here comes this low, slow pitch across the middle of the plate on a 3/2 count, bases loaded. Naturally Bush hits it out of the park. Everyone is horrified. Chirac dropped his mallet on his foot. Schroeder took his foot off of someone’s head and forgot to croquet it. An ugly American has arrived and changed the game. There is no way to accurately convey that information and also keep certain people happy.

Ever see the George Carlin routine on the difference between baseball and football? Believe me, Bush was being very nice on Kyoto.

Aug 12, 2005 - 6:43 pm 66. Jamie Irons:

Catherine,

I’m so pleased you like Chase Me Ladies…!!

I think I probably linked to:

Jennifer Lopez Has Been Shot!

perhaps the funniest conceivable parody of a Glenn Reynold’s like “linker” blog piece.

And one mustn’t forget the priceless “blog questionnaire”:

You are a British fox. How would you most like to be killed?

Jamie Irons

Aug 12, 2005 - 6:45 pm 67. Jamie Irons:

Rick

I love that cattle drive metaphor!

Do you stay up all night dreaming these up? You’ve got a million of ‘em!

Jamie Irons

Aug 12, 2005 - 6:49 pm 68. Sandy P:

–And while I shouldn’t put words in his mouth, I think it’s correct to say that he believes anyone traveling to Pakistan should be kept close tabs on. Close tabs meaning surveilled.–

Oh, boy, do I have bits of a story for you.

A 50-something (why can’t we all just get along) boomer goes to Pakland and meets and wants to marry a 20-something Paki and bring him back.

He’s here now and it’s not good.

The family’s hoping he can get deported after this.

Maybe this’ll clear the cobwebs from her head.

Aug 12, 2005 - 7:04 pm 69. Terrye:

I know theat Europeans were not happy about Kyoto, but Europeans come up with unworkable plan that not even Ted Kennedy can vote for. After which Bush does not ratify the already dead treaty. At that point these same Euros pitch a fit because he was so blunt in his rejection. Well? did it occur to them they might be the ones who screwed something up here?

When not one Senator will support it, perhaps is time to start thinking tha the program has a problems. And it does. In fact as time passes the problems are becoming ever more evident. And then when the US works out a program of its own with several Pacific nations intead of getting credit for at least trying to do something, we hear more complaints.

You want to hear complaints: just let our government support some silly program most Americans don’t even understand and that puts the economy in recession, drives up energy prices higher than they already are…. just to make a bunch of Eduropeans who generally smirk at us happy.

Think about it, why would an American trust a plan supported by people who make it plain they wish us harm or at least do not care if they harm us?

I think Bush does well on prepared speeches, but in press conferences and things like that he tends to speak like a regular human being instead of a politician. There are times when slick is handy, but there are also times when it is fake.

I think the media has gone nuts. Sheehan is just one case. That woman is not right in the head, she is being used and thanks to the circus mentality of our press corps all sense of public decorum is gone. vanished. This is the not the first war this country has ever fought, but I never remember a time when a mother would have been turned into a freak show like this.

I think that war heroes would be good. Soemthing to counter the insubordinate John Kerry Jr {Hackett} from Ohio..but how long would it take some reporter to ask them if the torured anyone or killed any civilians or whatever?

I dunno, but I know I am tired of jumping through hoops for foreigners. It is not as if they are so damned perfect themselves you know.

And as far as people getting it, I think a lot of people do and many of the ones who don’t are going to.

Aug 12, 2005 - 7:07 pm 70. Terrye:

sorry for the really lousy typing but I don’t believe in preview. It is unAmerican.

Aug 12, 2005 - 7:14 pm 71. Jamie Irons:

Terrye

sorry for the really lousy typing but I don’t believe in preview. It is unAmerican.

At last someone had the courage to say it.

It’s a great relief.

And I’m glad it was you.

Jamie Irons

Aug 12, 2005 - 7:21 pm 72. Rick Ballard:

Jamie,

I think it comes from a condition that those in the construction business refer to as ‘being half a bubble off’.

It’s good to see you and Catherine and TedM concerned. The last time that happened W won. Terrye’s reference to the OH 2 candidate – Hackett – is interesting. He ran as a kind of Kerry light but without the Good Target medals. Running a campaign that carefully did not mention party affiliation he lost against a weak RINO closely tied to Taft and his imbroglios. And then the Dems feted the loss. Granted the heavy Rep advantage in registration it’s nothing for the Reps to crow about but if this is the caliber of candidate the Dems are going with next fall, I’m not terribly concerned about losing the House – which is the only way in which the WoT could be threatened.

Strange to think that a year ago today we were discussing the Swift Boat Vets and the Copperheads total lack of interest in their story.

Terrye,

Damn straight that bastard Preeviw is un-American. We had him cornered in Waziristan but he slipped the leash. Katherine and I have arranged to have a small team of Gurkhas follow him into the Hindu Kush. We have high hopes because he took OBL’s goat with him and there appear to be Taliban in on the hunt.

Aug 12, 2005 - 7:30 pm 73. Terrye:

Rick:

That was not a goat, that was his fiance.

smarmy little bastard. always lurking about.

I prefer good old fashined screw ups myself. keeps people on their toes.

screwups are as American as stock car races and home made beer.

Aug 12, 2005 - 7:56 pm 74. TedM:

Almost bedtime here. Thus I will leave you with a link to VDH. The man tells it like it is and names our enemy.

http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200508120813.asp

Aug 12, 2005 - 8:02 pm 75. Terrye:

Speaking of unAmerican, why do we care if they like us or not?

Do the Russians worry about what the Europeans think of them?

Are they crushed if someone tells them Putin was so declasse when he came to sign the condolence book?

Do the Chinese lay awake wondering if the Brits will say rude and unkind things about them if they don’t show more concern about global warming?

If it is a hot day in Belgium do they make snide comments about India’s growing dependence on fossil fuels? Do the people of India feel the need to explain themselves?

Just who are these people to pass judgment on us in the first damn place?

Aug 12, 2005 - 8:02 pm 76. Buddy Larsen:

Indians need fossil fools? Yay, I’m going!

Aug 12, 2005 - 8:18 pm 77. Jamie Irons:

Terrye

I say this with love and respect, you are one of a kind. The true American article.

Rick

I’d say “three quarters of a bubble”…

But definitely no more than that.

Jamie Irons

Aug 12, 2005 - 8:21 pm 78. Buddy Larsen:

She come from Oklahoma, too, where the Highway Patrol pulls you over and asks “You got any ID?” and ya say back “Bout whut?”

Aug 12, 2005 - 8:27 pm 79. Rick Ballard:

Careful Buddy, unless the tribe has a casino there’s no money in it.

Aug 12, 2005 - 8:31 pm 80. Buddy Larsen:

But it’s enough just to be kneaded.

Aug 12, 2005 - 8:39 pm 81. Jamie Irons:

Buddy and Rick

Funny!

Buddy, your jape on fossil fuels reverses the old Firesign Theatre Rocky Rococo line, uttered in enraged contempt, “You fuels!”

Jamie Irons

Aug 12, 2005 - 8:42 pm 82. Terrye:

Buddy:

Hey, them is fightin words. We Okies are a tad sensitive about the city people making fun of the way we talk. Especially yankee city people.

My brother said they are uncapping some wells in Okie land. I hope so. Some Americans should get something out of the outrageous price of oil.

I blame Bush. If only he could express himself better. He could talk us into some new refineries. Sweet talk Hugo Chavez into pumping more oil, and maybe make the Saudis an offer they can’t refuse. oh well. what goes up…

I wish Bush was Olivier, but sometimes actions speak louder than words. Every now and then cliches work.

Aug 12, 2005 - 8:45 pm 83. Buddy Larsen:

Firesign Theater–that was comedy. Them and SCTV. Only Dave Chapelle that I know of is doing that whatever it is, today. And cliches are cliches because they’re so true. I kinda go along with those who appreciate Bush’s taciturnity–frustrating though it admittedly is. It’s adult behavior, as if the prez is saying, “…these are serious times, folks, and anybody who hasn’t ‘got’ that yet, doesn’t want to get it, and I simply have to put my effort into the rest, the others, those who comprehend the issues.”

Aug 12, 2005 - 9:16 pm 84. Orson2:

What’s especially interesting is not this piece by Davis, nor the remarks pro- and con- above. What’s more important is how this narrowly summarizes John Gibson’s “Hating America” and how these both contrast with Anne Applebaum’s recent broader consideration of the topic in Foreign Policy, “In Search of Pro-Americanism” in the world.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=220

Davis and Gibson masticate over old news. The new news is that, according to recent Pew surveys, America is liked best in the increasingly open and democratic world in ways that resemble traditional Republican constituencies.

For example, the industrialists in Italy and South Korea; the smaller business strivers there and immigrants to Austrailia; the parts of India that are urban and educated in India where outsourcing has resulted in good jobs and incomes from the US, affecting tens of millions in its growing new middle class; and even working-class people with large families in other Asian countries like Maylasia and Indonesia where US direct foreign investment has generated factory work and steps on the ladder towards a decent livelihood.

Since the war in Iraq has revealed America’s good intentions, opinion about the US has improved if you look at the relvant, expanded ways in which the US affects the changing world. Contrary to the expectations on the left for twenty years, the future looks to be about rising expectations fulfilled, AND with the hated US leading it.

This is profoundly important, because it means these carpers in Euroland and Britain are not only backward but backward looking and losing – and losing it!

So take heart rogerlsimon.com readers: the news is good and growing if you’re open enough to look for it in unexpected places and look at the whole world. The US led effort to fight Islamism is only one stage-setting indicator of other parts of world globalization, and the outlook is optimistic.

Aug 12, 2005 - 9:22 pm 85. Buddy Larsen:

He really, really lost the press that time midway thru first term, when in answer to some reporters’ questions about some news item, told them that he “..doesn’t read the papers.” It seemed like a crazy thing to say, but it sure got a few people thinking about the value and quality of the methods and meaning of reportage. How crazy we had been for so long not to see it, the ‘news’, as as the subjective, hortatory political project it had gotten to be, and how little we had realized that Big News never really had been delivering “the news”, but rather their news about the news.

Aug 12, 2005 - 9:31 pm 86. Terrye:

Buddy:

The news has become a soap opera, hence the popularity of Cindy Sheehan among the lefties and the reporters that hover around her like vultures over road kill.

Once upon a time, this would have been considered unacceptable behavior. Someone would have called her husband to take her home and her son’s death would not have become theatre.

This is Michael Moore’s world. This is Michael Jackson’s world.

Imagine what it will be like when the ACLU releases the other ABuGhraib pics. They will have to shift gears from the soldier as victim to the soldier as moron/torturer.

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:01 pm 87. Ric Locke:

I usually just lurk here, but this time — well, it’s fun and instructional watching people grab the wrong end of the snake and try to cope, but maybe something needs to be cleared up. Warning: this is the ClueBat 20kg version, and I don’t have full control on the backswing, so think before you get insulted.

The culture George Bush adopted as an adult is my native one, and I live less than a hundred miles from Crawford, among people for whom that culture is also native. From that perspective, I can tell you without fear that this discussion exposes the lie that is “multiculturalism”. Multiculturalists are no such thing. They are egotists who do not believe that any culture other than their own exists — that everyone, right down to Andaman Islanders, works from the same assumptions, beliefs, and cultural basis as their own, and fails to express that only in cases of ignorance, stupidity, and vileness. Thus “George Bush is stupid.” He is not. He is a man of slightly above average intelligence who is working from a different cultural basis.

Part of that cultural basis is the attitude toward eloquence. In this culture — repeat, a culture Bush adopted as an adult and follows with the well-known verve of the convert — eloquence is not a positive character trait. It is the attribute of the con-man and cheater; of the seller of shiny used cars with sawdust in the differentials; of the purveyor of six-for-five insurance policies that pay promptly upon lawsuit; of the order-taker for reroofing companies who takes advantage of the fears of little old ladies; of the sort of preacher who, having whipped the congregation into a fervid frenzy, goes trolling along the seats for pretty women to screw. Above all, it is the attribute of dishonest politicians and the sort of lawyer who never sees a client who isn’t guilty — and asks nothing but the size of the swag.

So expecting George Bush to be eloquent is, in his cultural context, to expect him to be not only dishonest but to lie about his dishonesty. This is a culture that admires the straight-up bank robber over the slick-talking con man. You may be honestly saying he needs to be a better communicator; what a man of my culture hears when you say that is that he should be “slicker” and less honest.

Furthermore, Bush cannot, under those circumstances, surround himself with eloquent people. Their very eloquence will disrecommend them; they don’t look honest in his cultural context.

What’s happening here is that you are failing to understand a moderately obvious, fairly major characteristic of a culture that’s right under your noses. It does not give me a great deal of confidence that you can, with assurance, tell me much about any other culture.

Regards,

Ric

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:05 pm 88. Terrye:

Ric is correct.

I grew up in south central Oklahoma. The socalled preachers that used to get some poor Okie to give them his last two dollars to pray for rain back in the dust bowl days was a slick talking snake oil salesman.

Not a man to be trusted.

Europeans do not realize that in much of America being a cowboy is not something to be ashamed of. Just look at all the heroes in our culture that have been taciturn, slow to speak and the sort known to keep their own council.

High Noon.

Now if Gary Cooper had been able to inspire the town folk, he would have had more company when it came time to fight the bad guys.

not hardly.

I don’t really know how to make PR work for a war.

not with an antagonistic press corps.

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:27 pm 89. Buddy Larsen:

I second that, from Terrye and Ric Locke. Crawford is an hour’s drive from here, as are Austin and San Antonio. This is the Outback, and it stretches out to Midland/Odessa, GWB’s formative land. The oil-patch guys aren’t formal communicators, and yet are pretty proud of their lives–meaning that being a good talker is a little suspect. Horse-traders are usually a little too fast-talking, is thwe folklore. It’s true, glibness, or any general social butterflyness, is a “parlor game” in the sticks out this way. Especially among the older generation. On the other hand, LBJ was born about 25 miles from where I sit, and he spun wordstorms of the highest order. Or did he? Come to think of it, he had a pretty big communication problem with the longer-settled parts of the country, too.

Aug 12, 2005 - 10:53 pm 90. lindenen:

Anne Applebaum had a column about this subject in the Washington Post a year or so ago. She was in Europe (I think) at a special dinner where the European host gave a toast about how he intended to support the US. She compared and contrasted the responses of the Americans present versus the Europeans to his toast and discussed how speaking styles play in Europe versus in America.

Aug 13, 2005 - 12:44 am 91. Buddy Larsen:

That’s a rather glowing last paragraph, there, Orson2. I think you’re right, we do need to play to the deep shift and we do need to make a special effort to be not deluded by the surface noise. In a way, perhaps, the anti-Americanism is being given a pass via the war–as if it (anti-Americanism) has a higher-falutin’ origin than the mere contradiction Americans have lived with for a century: Consumerism is simultaneously destructive of traditional tradition, slightly disreputable in most forms (a temptress), and (shiver & shudder), permanently hypnotically alluring.

So, progress really is up to no-good, stealing birthrights and such, and who cares if their birthright was short, brutish, and squalid–if it was stolen, dammit, then that’s an insult (well, maybe ’stolen’ isn’t exactly the word, but so what, people like that Bush guy sort of assume too much, sometimes, y’know?).

Anyway (to deeply paraphrase Lord Nelson), no one can go far wrong by placing oneself alongside somebody and complaining.

Aug 13, 2005 - 6:52 am 92. Luther McLeod:

Roger should have a place on the sidebar for great threads, this one would surely be there.

As to the subject, I’m not sure that eloquence or repetition or better PR would do much to alter the world’s view of the US. And frankly, at the present time, I don’t much care what the world thinks of us, unless it impedes the fight against the islamofacist murderers who wish to end Western Civilization. The rest is just noise that detracts from the focus of the fight.

Good to see you back Buddy. I would like to see PeterUK’s thoughts on this subject.

Aug 13, 2005 - 8:28 am 93. Kyda Sylvester:

Highly entertaining thread. Kudos, everyone.

The Irish say that God gave them whiskey so they would not rule the world (it worked too). I like to think that’s why He didn’t give George W a golden tongue.

I’ll leave you with a bit of wisdom gleaned from Jamie’s LOL Chase Me Ladies link:

Having testicles is like being chained to the village idiot; sad, but there it is. And when we have solved every racial, political and economic problem, we will still be stuck with that one.

Aug 13, 2005 - 8:39 am 94. TedM:

Good MOrning Luther.

I thought this thread was about over.

I too would like to hear from PeterUK. But he is “old” England. You know. The Mrs. MIniver era.

My thoughts are always centered on what we, as the US, think of “us”

The thread did bring up most of the feelings the regulars here have.

As someone said above, the country is split 33-33-34. That sounds about right.And it is that 34% independent, undecided, usually unaffiliated, who we are battling over.

Aug 13, 2005 - 8:46 am 95. Luther McLeod:

Morning to you TedM

I certainly agree on the 33 and a third split. I think it is only that middle third of undecided independents who are actively engaged in looking for the facts, and who can be swayed by those same facts. I shudder to think where we would be if not for the blog world.

Aug 13, 2005 - 9:12 am 96. Coisty:

Terrye – When not one Senator will support it, perhaps is time to start thinking tha the program has a problems

Exactly! Not one senator voted for Kyoto. Even those who sound like members of Greenpeace didn’t like it. So why didn’t Bush mention this? When he was interviewed on the subject he just smirked about jobs. You don’t need to be as slick as Willie to explain why Kyoto is a dog. Bush unnecessarily alienated many centrists and conservatives in Europe over this.

Some of you say you don’t care if the rest of the world doesn’t support you therefore it doesn’t matter that Bush is a hopeless communicator. Hey, that’s fine, but then why do so many Americans complain about not having support from other nations? What was all that whining about the French and other Europeans not supporting you or the Turks not allowing US troops through their territory? Commentators like Krauthammer were in a rage about the supposedly backstabbing Turks. Some “experts” on cable news claimed that the Turkish decision cost American lives. If you don’t want support and don’t care if your president explains things to foreigners then why all the crying?

The recent polls in the US show that it’s not just Europeans who need things explained to them. Not being able to communicate might be fine for an oil worker or farmer but when you are the leader of a nation it’s part of the job. If Bush isn’t up to the task then at least have spokesmen who are. Cheney seems to be the only person capable of communicating and I can’t recall the last time I saw or heard him. That McClellan fella is even worse than Fleischer.

Aug 13, 2005 - 9:43 am 97. TedM:

Luther,

Sad to say, the blog world is not as large as we would like. And those in it are part of the 2.3 decided one way or the other.

The 1/3 independents just don’t pay much attention. They are more aware of Aruba and JLO and whatever the latest rage is. They are not republicans or democrats, liberal or conservative.Ask them and they’ll tell you all politicians are the same. And when they vote it is motivated by one or two “feelings” they have about what is going on around them. And therein lies the PR problem.

I have tried to get some of the people I know in this group to read some books and articles. They show little interest. It is “boring”. They “don’t have time”.

Their news is from the local newspaper headlines, a little tv and cable news and maybe a weekly news magazine. The sound bite on the 6 oclock news is their window to the world. And, when they vote, their vote counts the same as the most well read voter. No wonder the liberals are for motor voter registration. These are the people a PR campaign should be used for.

Aug 13, 2005 - 9:47 am 98. TedM:

Coisty

You hit the nail on the head.

Aug 13, 2005 - 9:49 am 99. Coisty:

Germany has just rejected the use of force against Iran over its nuclear programme. http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200508/s1437072.htm

Schroeder is in an election battle. Last time (2002) his conservative opponent had close to a 20% lead in the polls until Schroeder played the Bush/Iraq card. With no one making the case for a war with Iraq it was easy for the anti-American left to win over the public. Looks like Schroeder’s going to try it again. Communication skills matter.

Aug 13, 2005 - 9:51 am 100. TedM:

Prediction

Iran and North Korea will continue to develop nuclear capabilities. Why? Because their is no one to stop them. That’s why.

Aug 13, 2005 - 9:53 am 101. maryatexitzero:

Speaking of the former Yugoslavia I was still living in the UK when Clinton launched his disgraceful assault on Serbia. Anti-American sentiment in Europe was very strong during that campaign. I recall many British people calling into a BBC radio programme mentioning the ‘genocide of the Indians,’ and Hiroshima in an attempt to show the US was no better than Serbia. There were anti-American riots all over Europe but for some reason Democrats don’t remember them.

Speaking as an American, most Americans found Europe’s willingness to tolerate ethnic cleansing in their own backyard “disgraceful”. Which is probably why we don’t remember those riots. Our opinions of Europe were so low, they just couldn’t get any lower.

Given Europe’s history of tolerating totalitarianism in its various forms (communism, fascism, Islamists) our opinion of Europe is about the same now as it has ever been. Britain stands apart from traditional European leanings toward totalitarianism, but they are more willing to appease lunacy then we are. Not that we hold that against you, you are what you are. That’s why our ancestors were willing to give up everything to come to America.

Speaking as an American of Irish descent, I can say that there is a very long list of people that the British don’t like. They don’t really favor the French, the Irish, Spain, Germany, the Dutch, the Swedes, the Russians, Australians, most Africans, most people in the Middle East (except for the Saudis), most of South Asia, etc.

Class differences have influence on how the British feel about their countrymen (more than in America). They’re always aware when someone has a more (or less) posh accent then they do, and they loathe anyone who tries to fake their accent or their background. They also have contempt for people who try to ingratiate themselves, put on airs. They also can’t stand people who laugh at their own jokes.

They’re still angry about the Revolutionary War. Seriously.

So, when dealing with Brits, we should be what we are, do what we please, try to understand where they’re coming from without changing our behavior to suit them. We can’t make them happy, we can’t make them like us, but our nations are usually fairly good at working together towards shared goals. That’s something.

Aug 13, 2005 - 10:06 am 102. Kalle (kafir forever):

Coisty, maybe people need to grow out of the impression that things will be explained to them. If someone cares about Kyoto, they should research the subject themselves. That 98-0 score is not hard to find, if one is aware of the Senate’s treaty responsibilities. The best answer to Kyoto-pushers would be in the form of a question: are you aware of the US Senate unanimous rejection of that treaty under the Clinton administration? switches the onus of thought onto the one who hasn’t done his homework.

Being conscious requires having an active mind. Unless you’re a Platonist and think we all live in a dark cave where our thoughts are passive reflections of the Truth some philosopher-king wields like sudden bolts from heaven. I’m an Aristotelian — informed opinion requires focused effort in order to adhere to the facts down here.

Much of the public discourse taking place in the US hasn’t reached Europe yet, because the dominance of the European MSM has not been challenged. Remember that much TV is state-controlled. In Sweden in the late 80s/early 90s the evening TV news report used to start with words such as “Imperialist Americans today declared that…” and “Our friends in East Germany/Cuba/…”. While the blogosphere is having a major impact on the very thoughtful part of the American public, the surface has barely been scratched in Europe (the UK being ahead, but barely). I don’t think Americans can conceive just how uniform the Western European intellectual landscape is, apart from the UK.

For instance, most (continental) Europeans believe that the concept of individual rights is a French invention. I did too, as I was taught history like that in high school, until I discovered John Locke and the American Revolution in my mid-20s because I accidentally got interested in Patrick Henry.

Aug 13, 2005 - 10:09 am 103. Luther McLeod:

Well TedM I suppose I am guilty of projecting. For sure I cannot return to the Dem’s for the foreseeable future. OTH I don’t consider myself a conservative Repub. That leaves me in the middle, where I do try to pay attention. I will no longer vote based strictly on party affiliation, of which I was guilty for far too many years. My vote will go to whomever evinces the strongest determination and will to pursue the war that we find ourselves in. I find all other issues ancillary to that mission.

Coisty

You make good points. But in this particular instance, re the WOT, I will take backbone and spine over nuance and verbal fluidity. Yes, it would be better to have all those characteristics in one person. Perhaps Condi in 08

Aug 13, 2005 - 10:24 am 104. Buddy Larsen:

Coisty’s dressing-down is much-deserved. Of course we do care about the impression we make. And of course we’d change our ways if we thought our ways were wrong.

But since those two truths don’t mesh very well, we’re left with “taking a position” on the matter. That the position we take (”Well, screw ‘em, who cares what they think!”) is the only responsible choice the situation offers, is just a damn shame.

It’s temporary, one must hope. As to how to hasten its demise, well, the answer to that is the difference between the two political parties. GWB is basically asking certain people to grow up and use their common sense.

Pretty insulting, if coming from your child. Something only seen in family interventions and such. The pain before the last-gasp 12-step program tries to reverse your gratuitous deterioration (aka feel-good politics).

Aug 13, 2005 - 10:27 am 105. TedM:

Luther,

I am with you. Was once considered a Rockefeller republican. And like you, I think that the Dems position on the War Waged Against Us by Islamic Jihadists, disqualifies them from my vote in the future.

JUst out of curiosity, do you have any feeling about how your friends, family and associates have changed their position on the war in the past 2 years. Meaning those opposed to the invasion now approving or those who were for it now having second thoughts and moving into the bringing the boys home crowd.

Aug 13, 2005 - 10:30 am 106. Luther McLeod:

TedM

Have to run out for a late breakfast shortly, but to briefly answer your question. Among family and friends I have seen no change. If al Moore says it, it must be true. They will brook no intrusion of facts upon their leftist bubble. I am alone here. Among associates at work it is not often discussed, those who were for it, still are.

Aug 13, 2005 - 11:15 am 107. Kevin P:

Roger;

I think Bush needs a better PR team for Americans, especially for his supporters and those who lean his way. Europe can’t be lumped into a single worldview but even if Bush was Olivier his policies and idea’s would get the cold shoulder from a majority of the continent. Imagine a silver tongued Bush telling Britain that it needed to clear out it’s radical imams before 7-7. He would have been portrayed as the racist war monger by a large portion of the populace, whether it was done smoothly or in a simple Texas twang. It is not Blair eloquence that is allowing him to implement the new tough policies it is the fear of death.

Bush needs help with the presentation of his policy message because he needs to buck up his supporters. His media team often comes off in a halting and defensive manor. Look who he brought in to help sheppard the Rogers nomination. Ex- senator and actor Fred Thompson. Why? Because he is media savvy and smart. The left and the press can not be swayed because they are a cloistered group who are dogmatic as any Orthodox religous group. I watch Bush’s actions and on the whole support him. From my years as a rabid Democrat I have gotten past my need for moving speechs. Mario Cuomo’s speech at the Democratic presidential convention was one of the most moving and inspiring speech I had ever heard. I still have physical memories of the stirring that it brought to my soul at the time. But he was a hollow politician who deeply wanted to be president but didn’t have the spine to risk defeat. And the content of the speech, on reflection, was beautiful but empty and devoid of practical solutions.

France and Germany were not going to get involved in Iraq and no one, eloquent or not, was going to get Schroeder and Chirac involved. Turkey crapped out on us because of internal considerations, much of it to do with their Kurdish problem. Bush needs to get on the ball to assure those who do agree with the WOT, I sense some wobbly knees out there.

Kevin Peters

Aug 13, 2005 - 12:31 pm 108. Jamie Irons:

I want to second what Kevin Peters just said.

Some of our discussion has been at cross purposes. Further up the thread someone made a good point about Bush’s being from a culture, or having adopted a culture, of almost laconic self-expression.

That’s fine. I don’t want him to go on and on in Clintonesque, or Mario-Cuomo-esque, endless, silver-tongued bloviation.

Just occasional brief reminders, as when (just last week?) he reaffirmed that we are in a war,, not a “Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism.”

That was very good. Excellent. Just a little more of that is all I would ask.

Jamie Irons

Aug 13, 2005 - 12:54 pm 109. Buddy Larsen:

Glad you cleared that up. I had thought you were asking for this guy!

Aug 13, 2005 - 1:56 pm 110. dan cliff:

I very much agree with Jamie’s last points (and most of his other points too! Though it might have been hard to tell…).

I also think the nature of Bush’s rhetoric works best when it is reporting on deeds accomplished, not talking about deeds to come. More Chrenkoff from the W.H.. The vision thing can be squeezed in succinctly next to a factual discussion and also during the few big speeches every year. In fact, I don’t think Bush’s political skills have been utilized very well by his staff, and it is a shame. I also think “shock and awe” and a bunch of other pomposities and pronouncements before deeds was amateurish. Very professional and very amateurish. It is a very interesting White House indeed.

Aug 13, 2005 - 2:01 pm 111. Syl:

TedM

33-33-34?

Heaven forfend. That’s not representative of our image abroad at all.

44-22-34

Now that’s an image more worthy of defending.

Aug 13, 2005 - 2:21 pm 112. TedM:

Syl, I am not sure of what you have in mind in your breakdown. And defending? where? Here or overseas?

One of the reasons I pay attention to British support is because the lack of international support is used against us. We identify better with Brits than other countries. Same language(almost) , same heritage,mother country and all that, etc etc etc. If the British government were to take the attitude of the French and Germans and other EU weenies we would be in a very tenuous international situation. And that would further weaken our national resolve. Politicians being what they are, it is important to have British public opinion not overwhelmingly against us.

Aug 13, 2005 - 2:41 pm 113. Kyda Sylvester:

Bush needs to get on the ball to assure those who do agree with the WOT, I sense some wobbly knees out there.

Caroline Glick detects wobbly knees in there:

The final bit of irony is that while in the wake of the London bombings the West is finally beginning to take the threat of suicide terrorism in its towns seriously, this newfound sobriety at home is occurring at the same time that the Bush administration is striking out on a policy of curtailing its war on terror abroad. This policy of curtailing US offensive actions against terrorism internationally is evident both in its handling of Iraq’s rapid deterioration into a Shi’ite-ruled Islamist state along the lines of Iran and even more dangerously in the US’s feckless handling of the rising Iranian nuclear threat.

So, what’s the concensus? Get rid of McClellan? Put Cheney out there more? Hire some Star Seach spokesmodel types? Have Dubya talk to us more? Less? Be more concerned about how the rest of the world perceives us? Less? Be more concerned about reaching out to (and reaching) those among us still unconvinced, still uninformed? Forget about them, they’re hopeless, and preach more to the choir?

Bush has a wide streak of Smart Alec in him (I empathize). I’m sure he knows that (I’m sure his mother told–tells–him as much frequently). He needs to work harder to keep that tendency curbed. President Bush is a man of considerable discipline (awesome, actually, to those of us who wish we could say the same) so I know he can do it.

Dan, I too often marvel at that professional/amateurish dichotomy. A most interesting White House.

Aug 13, 2005 - 2:53 pm 114. Rick Ballard:

TedM,

Thanks for the VDH link above. He always provides food for thought.

I believe that Syl was providing an aspirational exhortation to all men, reminding us that our reach should always exceed our grasp, that we should focus on cups overflowing bounteously, that time passes swiftly and therefore we must keep our eyes on the hourglass.

Think Dolly Parton.

Aug 13, 2005 - 3:57 pm 115. Steven Mitchell:

This administration is the most professionally run in my lifetime. Anyone European that needs the American president to explain why Kyoto is stupid needs more improvement than one speech by an American president can provide. The complaint otherwise is really a bad excuse: “Sure, I’d support Iraq, but Bush annoyed me when he flipped us off on Kyoto.” That is not the complaint of a mature person. If it wasn’t Kyoto, it would be some other reason why they couldn’t help.

I really don’t have a bit of doubt in my mind that if Bush had deigned to explain why Kyoto is so bad, someone would be on this topic complaining because he was condescending–explaining what everyone already knew.

But maybe I come from a different culture as well. If I tried to claim Kyoto had any redeeming virtues, my own mother would laugh in my face. At some point, respect for other people means that they figure things out themselves–or they don’t.

Aug 13, 2005 - 6:42 pm 116. Sandy P:

–Iran and even more dangerously in the US’s feckless handling of the rising Iranian nuclear threat.–

Feckless?

We let our “allies” handle it because, don’t forget, we’re only 1 of many nations, no better, no worse, they can do this because they’re Europe yada, yada, yada, and it’s our fault.

A pox on them.

the only reason it’s “our” fault is because peanut didn’t bomb them into oblivion.

Aug 14, 2005 - 12:45 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: