Newsweek Cover: After Bush What the world needs is an open, confident America.

---

Today, by almost all objective measures, the United States sits on top of the world. But the atmosphere in Washington could not be more different from 1982. We have become a nation consumed by fear, worried about terrorists and rogue nations, Muslims and Mexicans, foreign companies and free trade, immigrants and international organizations. The strongest nation in the history of the world, we see ourselves besieged and overwhelmed. While the Bush administration has contributed mightily to this state of affairs, at this point it has reversed itself on many of its most egregious policies—from global warming to North Korea to Iraq.

In any event, it is time to stop bashing George W. Bush. We must begin to think about life after Bush—a cheering prospect for his foes, a dismaying one for his fans (however few there may be at the moment). In 19 months he will be a private citizen, giving speeches to insurance executives. America, however, will have to move on and restore its place in the world. To do this we must first tackle the consequences of our foreign policy of fear. Having spooked ourselves into believing that we have no option but to act fast, alone, unilaterally and pre-emptively, we have managed in six years to destroy decades of international good will, alienate allies, embolden enemies and yet solve few of the major international problems we face.

In a global survey released last week, most countries polled believed that China would act more responsibly in the world than the United States. How does a Leninist dictatorship come across more sympathetically than the oldest constitutional democracy in the world? Some of this is, of course, the burden of being the biggest. But the United States has been the richest and most powerful nation in the world for almost a century, and for much of this period it was respected, admired and occasionally even loved. The problem today is not that America is too strong but that it is seen as too arrogant, uncaring and insensitive. Countries around the world believe that the United States, obsessed with its own notions of terrorism, has stopped listening to the rest of the world.

More troubling than any of Bush's rhetoric is that of the Republicans who wish to succeed him. "They hate you!" says Rudy Giuliani in his new role as fearmonger in chief, relentlessly reminding audiences of all the nasty people out there. "They don't want you to be in this college!" he recently warned an audience at Oglethorpe University in Atlanta. "Or you, or you, or you," he said, reportedly jabbing his finger at students. In the first Republican debate he warned, "We are facing an enemy that is planning all over this world, and it turns out planning inside our country, to come here and kill us." On the campaign trail, Giuliani plays a man exasperated by the inability of Americans to see the danger staring them in the face. "This is reality, ma'am," he told a startled woman at Oglethorpe. "You've got to clear your head."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19001200/site/newsweek/

W is a blight on decent Americans.

Perhaps the MSM is ready to jump the shark before the USS George Bush goes to the bottom

If the MSM jumps the shark, it doesn't mean that the MSM has seen the light but that the MSM is going to attach itself onto the Democrats and set the Democratic agenda.

Wall Street picks the winner, and they can easily pick a Democrat if the Republican is unelectable or ineffective.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/18569/what_is_jumping_the_shark.html

MSM jumped the shark years ago.

and he's right, we need to start talking about how we fix the mess Bush made.

I was just reading the global survey. Amazing how low bush has taken us.

:shrug: Figures.

The presidential campaign could have provided the opportunity for a national discussion of the new world we live in. So far, on the Republican side, it has turned into an exercise in chest-thumping. Whipping up hysteria requires magnifying the foe. The enemy is vast, global and relentless. Giuliani casually lumps together Iran and Al Qaeda. Mitt Romney goes further, banding together all the supposed bad guys. "This is about Shia and Sunni. This is about Hizbullah and Hamas and Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood," he recently declared.

But Iran is a Shiite power and actually helped the United States topple the Qaeda-backed Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Qaeda-affiliated radical Sunnis are currently slaughtering Shiites in Iraq, and Iranian-backed Shiite militias are responding by executing and displacing Iraq's Sunnis. We are repeating one of the central errors of the early cold war—putting together all our potential adversaries rather than dividing them. Mao and Stalin were both nasty. But they were nasties who disliked one another, a fact that could be exploited to the great benefit of the free world. To miss this is not strength. It's stupidity.

(I was so shocked when Mitt said that. How stupid is he?)

secretive, criminal fucks out of office?

it's going to take a pretty big miracle to undo what he has done to this country's image worldwide in even a generation.

and we have to start thinking about fixing the mess and how. and who is the best person to lead us to make sure we fix the problems and not waste time positioning and doing silly partisan one upsmanship. we have some very ugly truths that are going to need our whole country to get behind each other and fix it.

I think the key part of the article is the section on free trade, with some anti-Bush stuff before it and after it to make it go down easier.


For the Democrats, the new bogeymen are the poorest workers in the world—in China and India. The Democrats are understandably worried about the wages of employees in the United States, but these fears are now focused on free trade, which is fast losing support within the party. Bill Clinton's historical realignment of his party—toward the future, markets, trade and efficiency—is being squandered in the quest for momentary popularity. Whether on terrorism, trade, immigration or internationalism of any kind, the political dynamic in the United States these days is to hunker down.

To recover its place in the world, America first needs to recover its confidence. For those who look at the future and see challenges, competition and threats, keep in mind that this new world has been forming over the last 20 years, and the United States has forged ahead amid all the turmoil. In 1980, the U.S. share of global GDP was 20 percent. Today it is 29 percent. We lead the world in technology and research. Our firms have found enormous success in new markets overseas. We continue to generate new products, new brands, new companies and new industries.

We are not really in competition with Chinese and Indian workers making $5 a day. We want Americans to make things that they can't, move up the value chain and work on increasingly sophisticated products and services. We have an educational system that can help make this happen. Of the 20 best universities in the world, 18 are American. And the quality of American higher education extends far and deep, from community colleges to technical institutes.

Perhaps the most hopeful sign for the United States is that alone among industrial nations, we will not have a shortage of productive citizens in the decades ahead. Unlike Germany, Japan and even China, we should have more than enough workers to grow the economy and sustain the elderly population. This is largely thanks to immigration. If America has a core competitive advantage, it is this: every year we take in more immigrants than the rest of the world put together.

In many senses, the world is moving in the right direction. In continent after continent, countries are adopting more sensible policies. That is why we see the extraordinary phenomenon of truly global growth. America, Europe, Japan, China, India, Brazil, Russia, Turkey are all growing robustly. Even in Africa, the mood is different these days. Fifteen countries on the continent—with about a third of its population—are growing at more than 4 percent a year and are better governed than ever before. True, the United States faces a complicated and dangerous geopolitical environment. But it is not nearly as dangerous as when the Soviet Union had thousands of missiles aimed at American, European and Asian cities and the world lived with the prospect of nuclear war. It is not nearly as dangerous as the first half of the 20th century, when Germany plunged the globe into two great wars.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/6/3/15423/44498

"Will a Dem Win in 2008 Generate Rightwing Violence?

Three bloggers - digby at Hullabaloo, David Neiwart at Orcinus and Rick Perlstein at the Campaign for America's Future - have recently been discussing a subject that needs a good deal more attention: the potential for outbreaks of rightwing violence if the Republicans, who have embraced outrageously violent talk in many forums, are booted out of power come November 2008."

"Having spooked ourselves into believing that we have no option but to act fast, alone, unilaterally and pre-emptively.........."

WHAT????????

To paraphrase the old Lone Ranger/Tonto joke, what do you mean, "we," white man?

I have NEVER believed that we "have no option to act fast, alone, unilaterally
and pre-emptively." Nor have millions of Americans--well over a third back then,
well over half now. This was the Bush Lite regime line, and NOBODY other than they
and their extremist right-wing supporters believed that. They hold/held the reins
of power, and so were able to act as they saw fit, but PLEASE don't try and tell
me that I, or anyone who believes as I do, EVER "spooked ourselves" into believing
that drivel. If this is the MSM talking about themselves, then OK, but don't try
to project the gullibility of the MSM onto the rest of the country, or at least
those who saw through that bu(ll)shit from the very beginning. I NEVER believed it. Not then, not now.

I'll even go out on a limb here, and venture a guess I'm not alone, here, either.

The MSM has still apparently not figured out that they do not necessarily speak
for the rest of the country.

How DARE they take the 75% of the country that HATES THAT PUSTULE, the REAL Americans and use all these terms to say that WE AS AMERICANS have done THIS or THAT..

I know *I* Haven't, have YOU?

Hell NO, WE were Marching, antiwar from the start, my site Takebackthemedia.com was fighting against this SMEARING of America by BUSH for 6 Years now.

DO NOT say that WE have done this, NOpe, BUSH and CHENEY and RICE and ROVE, etc have DONE THIS, ALL OF IT.

They are the SCUM, NOT US.

I love how the media decides that WE have supported BUSH somehow. Assholes.

Propagandists, they should be marched off the Hague along with the entire Bush Admin, line the dame Media up AGAINST THE WALL.

used to abhor Michael Isikoff for all the suck up jobs he did on the bushitas.

Leaves me thinking that the rove, cheney bushits are guilty of overkill.

Nope. So long as this oozing pustule of incompetence and his buddies remain in positions of power, exposing them and beating them back on every front is the only way of slowing them (slightly) from spreading even more of their so-called "compassionate conservatism" upon America and the world. Personally, I won't be satisfied until Emperor Chucklenutz' polls are in the DICK Cheney range and even his long-time allies have deserted him.

We can multitask. There's much work to be done, and we can plan for that.

But at the same time, I want to see his policies squashed squishy. I'll be happy to stop bashing him when he and his cronies are out of office. But not before.

I agree, the time to stop that is when he is no longer in a position to do
any further harm.

True, we need to concentrate on taking apart the next Republican candidate
when he has been chosen, because they will be fully prepeard for the next
Democratic nominee to try and run against Bush instead of their nominee,
seeing as how it will be so easy. But their candidate will be running
against Bush, too. Karl Rove is not an idiot. That can't be our only
argument for turning over the White House to us. It's not enough.

But still:

The fact remains that Bush is still in a position to do a LOT of damage,
and from the looks of things, he intends to do so when he can. Look for
more recess appointments of unqualified cronies/crooks, attempts to portray
anyone who dissents as treasonous, and heaven help us if John Paul Stevens
should be unable to stay on the Supreme Court long enough for Bush to
leave office.

Yes, the Republican party is trying to distance themselves from the sinking
ship that is Bush, but he and Cheney can still do plenty of damage before
they are gone, and I, for one, fully believe they will grab the chance every
time they get one.

Bash away!

have been, newsweek?

The coup didn't work out so freakshow well?

THis country would have been so different now if the corporatemediawhores had stood up to rove & cheney instead of cowering on their knees. Now, are Time, the news(?)papers who endorsed bush in 2004, and the cableshits who smeared Kerry going to get behind our Dem candidate in 2008..to insure we get an open, confident government??????

Edit~ Recommend~