Goodbye, Hello

As we say, with relief, good-bye to George W. Bush, and welcome, with great relief, Barack Obama, I think it's appropriate to review two of the notable speeches given this week. George W. Bush gave his farewell address to the nation on Thursday night, but only about 5 people noticed, and even Dick Cheney nodded off. The bigger story that night was an airplane crash and subsequent "heroism on the Hudson".
Earlier in the week, Senator Hillary Clinton began the process to become Secretary of State, and made some opening remarks to the committee. Many people, especially those on the committee, listened very carefully to what she had to say. Let's examine these two speeches, shall we?
I know Bush and Clinton have speechwriters, but they did have input, and they do have to take responsibility for what they say. In Clinton's case, she was speaking on behalf of the new administration. But still, I was struck at how different the very tone of their remarks were. I believe that the administration of Barack Obama will be quite different from the current administration, and that belief was reinforced as I read their speeches. All I can say is, thank goodness the ways of the past eight years are coming to an end!
The Bush years were most heavily impacted by the events of Sept. 11, 2001; I think all would agree with that. But there is a time to take the lessons learned and move on--something I think never happened with the administration. The point that he always seemed to raise, and that helped immensely in his re-election in 2004, was "Be afraid. It could happen again." He continued with this theme to the very end: "As the years passed, most Americans were able to return to life much as it had been before 9/11. But I never did. Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our nation. And I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe....But there can be little debate about the results. America has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on our soil....Our nation is blessed to have citizens who volunteer to defend us in this time of danger." Indeed, be afraid. Be cautious and suspicious of all, especially "the others"--defined by the Bush administration as those who would disagree with his administration, chief among them, the Democrats.
It's a breath of fresh air to hear these words from Clinton: "The president-elect and I believe we must return to the time honored principle of bipartisanship in our foreign policy, an approach that has served our nation well. I look forward to working with all of you to renew America's leadership through diplomacy that enhances our security, advances our interests, and reflects our values.... In spite of all the adversity and complexity, there are so many opportunities for America out there, calling forth the optimism and can-do spirit that has marked our progress for more than two centuries. Too often, we see the ills that plague us more clearly than the possibilities in front of us, but it is the real possibility of progress, of that better life free from fear and want and discord, that offers our most compelling message to the rest of the world."
While Bush has told us to "be afraid" for most of the last seven years, it's odd to hear, in his parting address to the nation, these words: "In the face of threats from abroad, it can be tempting to seek comfort by turning inward. But we must reject isolationism and its companion, protectionism. Retreating behind our borders would only invite danger." Huh?
Maybe he took to heart the words Hillary Clinton spoke earlier in the week: "Now, in 2009, the clear lesson of the last 20 years is that we must both combat the threats and seize the opportunities of our interdependence, and to be effective in doing so, we must build a world with more partners and fewer adversaries. America cannot solve the most pressing problems on our own, and the world cannot solve them without America. The best way to advance America's interests in reducing global threats and seizing global opportunities is to design and implement global solutions. That isn't a philosophical point. This is our reality. The president-elect and I believe that foreign policy must be based on a marriage of principles and pragmatism, not rigid ideology, on facts and evidence, not emotion or prejudice. Our security, our vitality, and our ability to lead in today's world oblige us to recognize the overwhelming facts of our interdependence. I believe that American leadership has been wanting, but is still wanted. We must use what has been called smart power, the full range of tools at our disposal -- diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural -- picking the right tool or combination of tools for each situation. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of our foreign policy. This is not a radical idea."
It was interesting to notice another theme emerge as Bush spoke to the nation; it's a theme he has embraced throughout his presidency, and is a kiss on the lips to those who elected him: "The battles waged by our troops are part of a broader struggle between two dramatically different systems. Under one, a small band of fanatics demands total obedience to an oppressive ideology...The other system is based on the conviction that freedom is the universal gift of Almighty God and that liberty and justice light the path to peace. This is the belief that gave birth to our nation. And in the long run, advancing this belief is the only practical way to protect our citizens." It's hard to tell exactly what belief he wants to "advance" on the world, but what jumped out at me were the words, "freedom is the universal gift of the Almighty God." My question is, and always has been, "Whose God"? Pushing an ideology is tricky if you're also ignoring the culture and beliefs of another society. That's why Clinton's words comforted me: "George Marshall noted that our gravest enemies are often not nations or doctrines but hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos. So to create more friends and fewer enemies, we must find common ground and common purpose with other peoples and nations to overcome hatred, violence, lawlessness, and despair."
In the end at least they found some common ground: as Bush remarked, "But every day I have been inspired by the greatness of our country and uplifted by the goodness of our people...I will always be honored to carry a title that means more to me than any other: citizen of the United States of America," and Clinton echoed: "No matter how daunting the challenges may be, I have a steadfast faith in this country and in our people. And I am proud to be an American at the dawning of this new American moment."
In less than two days, we will have a new president, and I find myself in agreement with these two very different leaders; I too am proud to be an American. An American who will undoubtedly disagree with our new President, but right now finds a lot of hope in the words from his administration.