More on the misadventures of Clueless George

In the wee hours of Sunday morning, I went to the New York Times website to see the latest headlines. I came across one that made me laugh 'til I stopped--which was about one third into the article because then I went to anger and then to stunned silence.

The headline: A Bush Alarm: Urging U.S. to Shun Isolationism

Writer David Sanger largely expresses what I was planning to do in any follow up posts to Bush is still clueless about the ports deal, so I will quote some of the choicer passages--and add a few comments of my own.

Sanger's opening paragraph, sprinkled with just the right amount of sarcasm, almost says it all:

The president who made pre-emption and going it alone the watchwords of his first term is quietly turning in a new direction, warning at every opportunity of the dangers of turning the nation inward and isolationist, and making the case for international engagement on issues from national security to global economics.

My comment: flippity-floppity-flip-flop-flip.

Sanger next discusses how Bush is embarking on a PR-tour to generate support for the Iraq war, and points out that

rather than simply delve into the familiar talk about the need to root out terrorists abroad so they cannot strike Americans here, the White House plans to have Mr. Bush expand his discussion of the need for the United States to embrace a new role in the world, even if that means explaining the benefits of globalization to a nation that does not appear to be in a mood to hear that message.

It is yet another change for a man who came to office talking of a "humble foreign policy," and after Sept. 11 used the hammer of the world's sole superpower around the globe.

My comment: To the extent the "nation that does not appear to be in a mood to hear that message," George and his anything but humble foreign policy and the "post 9-11 world" he generated are to blame.

And now for the heart of the matter:

To his critics, the internationalist approach is too little too late — the price Mr. Bush has paid for a foreign policy that seemed relentlessly focused on building defensive walls and hunting enemies.

My comment: I take issue with "the critics" on this point. Bush's current approach is WAY TOO FREAKING LATE. As I have tried to explain before, Bush's attempt to change rather than stay the course is pretty much doomed to failure. The arrogance and stupidity of the Bush administration rendered any attempts at damage control almost impossible close to three years ago, but at this stage of the game, those attempts are simply way too damn late.

And here is the last quote I will use from Sanger:

Now Mr. Bush is moving into a new phase of his presidency, not by choice or natural inclination, it seems, but by necessity.

I am stunned that Bush figured this out at all. Too bad Clueless George and the rest of his administration didn't realize over three years ago that arrogance is not a viable foreign policy, that isolationism is not possible in today's world (and the world over three years ago), and that we cannot succeed in a war on terror or in protecting this country's interests by going it alone.