Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts

Friday, February 27, 2009

Obama Administration moves to overturn Bush's 'Conscience rule'

The Washington Post brings word that the Bush Administration's 'conscience' rule on abortions will likely be rescinded by the Obama administration:

The administration's plans, revealed quietly with a terse posting on a federal Web site, unleashed a flood of heated reaction, with supporters praising the proposal as a crucial victory for women's health and reproductive rights, and opponents condemning it as a devastating setback for freedom of religion. [...]

Administration officials stressed that the proposal will be subject to 30 days of public comment, which could result in a compromise. They said they remain committed to seeking a middle ground but acknowledged that will not always be possible.


"We recognize we are not going to be able to agree on every issue," said an administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the process has just begun. "But there remains a substantive area of common ground, and we continue to believe we can make progress and will make progress." [...]

The debate centers on a Bush administration regulation, enacted in December, that cuts off federal funding for thousands of state and local governments, hospitals, health plans, clinics and other entities that do not accommodate doctors, nurses, pharmacists or other employees who refuse to participate in care they feel violates their personal, moral or religious beliefs.

Friday, January 16, 2009

Farewell (and a heartfelt thanks) to President George W. Bush

George Weigel would like to thank President Bush. "For what, you ask? For many things that ought to count for Catholics":

I should like to praise him for his steadfast support of the pro-life cause, domestically and internationally. Thanks to President Bush, we have two more Supreme Court justices who likely know that Roe vs. Wade was terrible constitutional judging, and dozens more federal district court and appellate court judges with similar convictions. Thanks to President Bush, the U.S. government drew an important moral line in stem cell research, even as the administration accelerated bioethically sound research strategies that have produced real results. Internationally, the Bush administration stood firm against the Gadarene rush to use international law to declare abortion an international human right and a necessary component of the emancipation of women; as one senior Vatican official put it to me, a year ago, “We know we’re never going to have another American administration as supportive of our core issues as the Bush administration has been.”

I should like to praise the President for his work to rid Africa of the plagues of AIDS and malaria and to relieve the suffering of those afflicted with those awful diseases. George W. Bush may be an object of ridicule in certain U.S. zip codes; he is the subject of veneration among those in the “bottom billion” whose lives his policies have saved or enhanced.

I should like to thank the President for offering Pope Benedict XVI such a warm welcome on the South Lawn of the White House on April 15, 2008 — a welcome that ought to have put paid, once and for all, to the notion that there is something incompatible between robust Catholic faith and a mature gratitude for the political miracle of American democracy.

I should like to thank President Bush for his personal decency, manifest in his (unpublicized) personal attention to our wounded and to the families of the fallen; in his refusal to become bitter in the face of outrageous slander; and in his calm amidst tribulations that most of us can’t imagine. I should like to thank him for his unapologetic confession of Christian faith, and for his testimony to the importance that prayer plays in his life. And I should like to thank him for not giving a hoot about the mockery that such a witness draws from a secularized mass media, from American high culture, from cranks like Michael Moore, and from Euro-secularist snobs who spent eight years sneering at the evangelical cowboy in the White House while their continent was dying from spiritual boredom.


Related


  • President Bush's Farewell Address to the Nation January 15, 2009.
  • National Sanctity of Human Life Day, 2009, A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America. January 15, 2009.
  • The blogger at Wheat & Weeds covers a list of President Bush's pro-life accomplishments during his two terms. Be sure to read as well her roundup: George Bush and the Least of These:
    I will always love and admire Bush because as the Leader of the Free World he never missed an opportunity to stand with "the least of these." Can you think of anyone more forgotten and less important in the eyes of our culture than the unborn, African AIDS & malaria patients, Afghan women, Sunni & Shiite Muslims, immigrants, dissidents of tyrannical nations, the wounded and grieving parents of fallen soldiers? Nobody really cares about any of those folks --the media can't even be bothered to report their plight when it doesn't suit their own purposes to do so. Not so George Bush. Here's a little pictorial reminder of the man's perpetual commitment to the dignity of the human person. ...

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Political Heresy: Bush Won the Iraq War (With a Strategic Push from McCain)

That's at least the conclusion I draw from a recent report by well-regarded Iraq blogger/correspondent Michael Yon at this link. Here is the crucial excerpt:

The war continues to abate in Iraq. Violence is still present, but, of course, Iraq was a relatively violent place long before Coalition forces moved in. I would go so far as to say that barring any major and unexpected developments (like an Israeli air strike on Iran and the retaliations that would follow), a fair-minded person could say with reasonable certainty that the war has ended. A new and better nation is growing legs. What's left is messy politics that likely will be punctuated by low-level violence and the occasional spectacular attack. Yet, the will of the Iraqi people has changed, and the Iraqi military has dramatically improved, so those spectacular attacks are diminishing along with the regular violence. Now it's time to rebuild the country, and create a pluralistic, stable and peaceful Iraq. That will be long, hard work. But by my estimation, the Iraq War is over. We won. Which means the Iraqi people won.

Source link (July 14, 2008, post by Michael Yon; emphasis added).

The only way we can pull defeat out of apparent victory is to elect Barack Obama whose weak rhetoric and nonsensical, arbitrary mantra of "withdrawal, withdrawal, withdrawal" in 16 months will simply embolden our enemies to persist and try to overturn the progress made in Iraq. The job remains to be finished, consolidated, and secured. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory would be catastrophic for the United States. McCain is the only candidate we can rely on to finish the job, wisely and responsibly--especially since McCain almost singlehandedly pushed for the winning surge strategy in Iraq. In addition, as Michael Yon also reports in the same post, there is serious trouble in Afghanistan. McCain is the Commander-in-Chief to take charge and turn that situation around also. Obama is the last, best hope of our enemies in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Catholics should be very, very concerned when they see Obama, the new Neville Chamberlain, seeking to snatch defeat out the jaws of victory won against the forces of terror--a victory won in spite of Obama's outspoken opposition to McCain's winning surge strategy in Iraq. Obama is "a dog that won't hunt" as Commander-in-Chief, especially in wartime.

Saturday, June 14, 2008

Pope Benedict gives President Bush a Warm Greeting at Vatican

"Bush treated to warm greeting at Vatican" reports the Associated Press:

ROME (AP) — Pope Benedict XVI took President Bush on a rare stroll through the lush grounds of the Vatican Gardens on Friday, stopping at a grotto where the pontiff prays daily.


"Your eminence, you're looking good," Bush told the pope shortly after arriving at the Vatican, launching the leaders' third visit together.


Source: Reuters

Normally, VIPS are received in the pope's library in the Apostolic Palace. That's where Bush had his first meeting with Benedict in June 2007.


But in a gesture of appreciation for the hearty welcome Bush gave him in Washington in April, Benedict welcomed the president and first lady Laura Bush near St. John's Tower in the lush Vatican Gardens. ...

On a brief tour, Benedict and Bush peered out from a tower balcony, and the president seemed awed by what he saw. The pope pointed out St. Peter's dome as he showed Bush the view.


"This is fantastic up here," Bush said. "Thank you so much for showing me this."


White House press secretary Dana Perino said the two leaders have the kind of relationship that allows them to speak frankly. They discussed such issues as human rights, HIV and AIDS in Africa, and poverty around the world, she said.


Source: Reuters


After their private meeting ended, Bush and Benedict posed for official photographs and exchanged gifts.


The president gave the pontiff a photograph of the two walking along the White House colonnade on their way to the Oval Office in April. The picture was presented in a sterling silver frame with an engraved presidential seal.


Benedict gave Bush a framed photograph and four volumes on St. Peter's Basilica.


"Perhaps you'll have some time to read it," he told Bush, whose presidency ends in January.


Members of the presidential entourage received rosaries and medals of the pontificate.


Bush and the pope then strolled through the gardens to see the Lourdes Grotto, which was donated to Pope Leo XIII at the turn of the century by French Catholics. Bush and Benedict sat in wooden patio-style chairs admiring the grotto as Mrs. Bush rejoined them.


Source: Associated Press / Evan Vucci

A statement by the Vatican after Bush's visit said that the pope had "renewed his gratitude for the warm and special reception he received in the United States of America and at the White House in April, and for the commitment in defense of the fundamental moral values." The two leaders talked about relations between the U.S. and Europe, globalization, the world food crisis and international trade, among other topics, the Vatican said.

Sunday, June 08, 2008

Father Joseph Fessio on President Bush & Pope Benedict XVI

(Via Carl Olson of Ignatius Insight): President Bush will pay a visit to the Vatican on Friday (June 13th) -- his sixth visit with a Pope, and third with Benedict XVI this year. The Religion News Service's Francis X. Rocca spoke with Fr. Joseph Fessio, student and friend of the Holy Father, on this remarkable relationship between Pope and an American President:

In the president, the pope finds a key supporter of the Catholic church's positions on such controversial questions as abortion, stem-cell research and same-sex marriage. Bush's arguments have frequently echoed Benedict's appeals to "natural law" and even employ the terms of Catholic social doctrine (despite the fact that the president is a Methodist).

Nowhere has the congruence of their thinking been clearer than at April's welcoming ceremony at the White House, when Bush cited Benedict's denunciation of the "dictatorship of relativism," and the pope noted the importance of American religiosity as inspiration for abolitionism and the civil-rights movement.

To which Bush replied, "Thank you, Your Holiness. Awesome speech."

"They could pretty much have given each other's speech," said William McGurn, Bush's former head speechwriter and a Catholic, who was present at the ceremony (but did not write the president's remarks).

Fessio agreed. "In terms of authentic, normative Catholic teaching, I don't see any area in which the pope and President Bush disagree," he said.

The most notable case of disharmony between the two leaders was over the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger opposed at least as ardently as Pope John Paul II.

"But Iraq is not a matter of Catholic social teaching," Fessio said.

Likewise, Benedict's views on economics, taxation and government regulation (which are known to lie to the left of Bush's) are merely his personal opinions, not doctrine that he holds as binding on the faithful, Fessio said.


Related


Update


  • "When Pope Benedict XVI and U.S. President George W. Bush meet at the Vatican June 13, they will scrap the usual formal protocol and instead hold talks and take a leisurely stroll in the Vatican Gardens", reports Catholic News Service:
    The Vatican opted for the "particular" and "unusual" setting as a way to show its appreciation for "the cordial welcome and meeting held at the White House" during the pope's April 15-20 visit to the United States, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman, said June 9.

    Normally heads of state visiting the pope at the Vatican are taken with much fanfare to the pope's library in the main Apostolic Palace.

    But "in light of the (pope's) recent pastoral visit to the United States and the United Nations" and for the warm welcome and hospitality shown the pope during his meeting with Bush on the pope's birthday, April 16, an informal setting at the Vatican was chosen instead, said Father Lombardi.

    Father Lombardi said Pope Benedict will meet the president and his wife, Laura Bush, at 11 a.m. at the westernmost tip of the Vatican Gardens at the entrance of St. John's Tower.

    The pope and Bush will go to a studio on the top floor of the tower to hold closed-door talks after which the two men "will take a brief stroll in the Vatican Gardens," the spokesman said.


Sunday, June 01, 2008

The Iraq War Issue: The Facts Indicate a U.S. Victory

Here is the excellent commentary from the Campaign Spot blog at NationalReview.com. In the midst of all the fashionable Bush-hating, I have gone out on a limb before and said that historians will eventually rate Bush as a great war leader against Islamic extremism and will credit him with the guts to overthrow the genocidal Saddam Hussein. The facts are pointing in that direction, but don't hold your breath waiting for the historians to come on board right away. It will take time, but I believe the objective historians who will be able to analyze the events of the last few years with the benefit of more time having elapsed will eventually come around to elevating the stature of George W. Bush's war leadership and presidency. In fact, the Bush precedent of overthrowing the genocidal Saddam Hussein is a great precedent for the demise of other genocidal regimes. That precedent is a great victory for humanitarianism and for the international rule of law. Catholics and other Christians should applaud it.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Paul Kengor on "Why the Rudy Rejection Matters"

Paul Kengor on Why the Rudy Rejection Matters (National Catholic Register):

The reality is that the rejection of Rudy by Republicans should not be brushed off lightly and quickly; it merits pause for careful reflection, and perhaps even celebration.

Let there be no doubt that Rudy was refused because of outrage at how he proudly and unequivocally supports a “woman’s right to choose.” This was a Republican religious rejection of Rudy. He was rejected not only by evangelicals but by the pro-life Catholics who share his party and his faith.

Yet, it was also much more, especially for Republicans and for Catholics. Consider the big picture:

Over the last two or three decades, the Democratic Party has increasingly championed policies that extinguish what Pope John Paul II and his Church have called the first of all freedoms and the most basic of all human rights: the right to life.

Since Roe v. Wade, and particularly since Ronald Reagan’s election in 1981, the Republican Party (by and large) has not sacrificed its soul at the altar of political expediency on the abortion issue. Republicans like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have battled dogmatic abortion advocates in the Democratic Party like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and now Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, for whom abortion remains a kind of political sacrament, even though some of them are Catholic. . . .

All of this now brings us to a historic crossroads: Thanks to pro-life diligence by certain Republicans, and particularly two decades of generally decent court appointments by Reagan and Bush (along with some obvious failures), Roe v. Wade has the chance of being reversed under the next president.

And that’s where denying Rudy Giuliani the 2008 Republican nomination and the presidency becomes so profoundly important: If Roe v. Wade is reversed, Catholics, and Catholics who are Republican, will be spared the shame of a Catholic Republican president unable to understand or make the moral case against abortion. They will be spared the spectacle of a Catholic Republican president voicing his “personal disagreement” with the decision.

However, if Obama's momentum persists as it has been, we may very well find ourselves with a president wholeheartedly committed to the preservation of the "right to choice" under Roe v. Wade. There's the rub.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

On the Record Now, Even If With Few Others

Yes, it has been 6 years since Sept. 11, 2001. Little did I know that the words of FDR about Pearl Harbor that I memorized for a high school forensic competition would turn out to be so apt in the future: this is certainly a date that "will live in infamy."

What is amazing to me is that we have not been attacked again in 6 years. In my view, that is a signal and amazing achievement of President George W. Bush. He takes a lot of blame and criticism--just as Lincoln and Reagan did--so he should also get the credit. I will also take this opportunity to state for the record that, in my opinion, history will judge George W. Bush to have been one of our best Presidents. I do that knowing that many of the Monday morning quarterbacks and backseat drivers that litter the landscape will cringe at that statement. Let them cringe. I am entitled to express my own view. That's why my parents immigrated to a free country from a Communist dictatorship. We didn't yield our freedom to a crazed dictator in Cuba. I certainly won't yield it now to mass opinion or water cooler talk.

And in my positive evaluation, I include the overthrow of the genocidal dictator in Iraq and the crusade to build a democracy in the heart of the Moslem Middle East. My own theory--everyone has theories, so I can too--is that being on the offensive in Iraq is why we have not been attacked again in six years. I hear that others have stated the same view. The best defense is a good offense--a cliche that is a cliche because it is so well proven in experience. Many do not see or do not want to see the connection now. My bet is that historians with mature judgment will see it in the future. Lincoln went from vilified to adored. Reagan went from mocked to being missed. George W. Bush will go from being scorned to being admired and respected as the unflagging President who kept us safe for 6 years. That already is a remarkable achievement and benchmark for comparison. I hope and pray that he can add the rest of his term to this record of protection. Thank you, Mr. President.

Sunday, June 10, 2007

Pope & President Meet in Rome


Here is the link to the N.Y. Times story. The President promised to get more funds to fight AIDS in Africa. They also discussed foreign policy.

(Photo Credit: Jim Watson/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images)

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Bush Appointees Key to Upholding Partial Birth Abortion Ban

Yesterday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court announced a 5-4 victory for pro-life forces that endangers Roe v. Wade. The victory upholds the ban on partial birth abortion signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2003. Here are the five justices voting to uphold the ban: Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Sam Alito, Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Justice Anthony Kennedy. The losers, this time, were these four: Justices Breyer, Souter, Stevens, and Ginsburg. Here is the link to the AP story. There will be a lot of chest-thumping Bush fans today among pro-life Catholics and other pro-life Christians. I, for one, have never flagged in my support of George W. Bush, in spite of the firestorm over the Iraq war. Thanks, President Bush, for keeping your campaign promises to appoint pro-life justices like John Roberts and Sam Alito.

Sunday, November 19, 2006

President Bush's Choice for Family Planning Post Criticized

According to the Washington Post, liberals aren't very happy with President Bush's appointment for the head of the family-planning programs at the Department of Health and Human Services:

The Bush administration has appointed a new chief of family-planning programs at the Department of Health and Human Services who worked at a Christian pregnancy-counseling organization that regards the distribution of contraceptives as "demeaning to women."

Eric Keroack, medical director for A Woman's Concern, a nonprofit group based in Dorchester, Mass., will become deputy assistant secretary for population affairs in the next two weeks, department spokeswoman Christina Pearson said yesterday. . . .

Marilyn Keefe, interim president of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, which represents 4,000 family-planning clinics, said Keroack's work "seems to really be geared toward furthering anti-choice, anti-contraception policies." She added that despite the congressional election results, the appointment "goes to show you the importance of controlling the White House and how important federal agencies are in the delivery of health services."

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

The Non-Appeasing President

That is why I predict that historians will consider George W. Bush one of our great presidents. The last few days have seen the killing of the Al Qaeda leader in Iraq--the most visible and dangerous Al Qaeda leader because the others are in hiding and are not on the frontline. We saw the Iraqi cabinet finally completed as the national unity government, which includes representatives of all the major ethnic groups (including one Christian cabinet member), agreed on ministers for the crucial posts dealing with security. The new Iraqi prime minister appears to be a man of effective, no-nonsense action who is already implementing a plan to secure his capital from uncontrolled violence. It was all capped off yesterday with the President's surprise visit to Baghdad to deliver two messages: the U.S. commitment is solid, but the future is in the hands of the new permanent, democratically elected Iraqi government.

In addition, there was good political news for the President because his chief political advisor, Karl Rove, was cleared by the federal prosecutor investigating the so-called CIA leak case. (Let me be clear: the CIA leak investigation is a joke, it should never have been initiated, and the current charges against the Vice-President's former chief of staff should be dismissed. But at least Rove is finally off the hook. Justice has been served at least in his case.)

Moreover, the foolhardy Democrats are falling all over themselves. They lost their Katrina issue when their favored candidate, Mitch Landrieu, lost his bid to become mayor of New Orleans and manage the reconstruction of the city. The reelected mayor of New Orleans who defeated Landrieu, contrary to virtually all pundit predictions, promptly and profusely thanked President Bush for his efforts to reconstruct New Orleans. The Democrats lost their hyped-up corruption issue with the spectacle of Louisiana Democratic Congressman William Jefferson refusing to resign even though the FBI has solid evidence of bribery allegations, including finding thousands of dollars in his freezer. To boot, Democratic Congressman Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island pleaded guilty yesterday to driving under the influence of prescription medicine--we will never know whether alcohol was involved because he got favored VIP treatment from the Capitol police who excused him from a field sobriety test. True to the hoary Kennedy tradition, some are above the laws that apply to the rest of us. But the very rich have tended to have that outlook throughout history.

But back to the main issue: character and leadership. And it has to do with Iraq. Bush does not have the appeasement mentality that is so common in our culture. Another word for the appeasement mentality is that gift from the world of psychology: codependency. Appeasement is the older term and has the benefit of reminding us of the debacle of this mode of relating to others in the years preceding World War II. When you deal with the irrational, you can't adopt the tactic of pleasing or coddling. To the irrational or malicious, the attempt to please is a sign of weakness inviting a boot on the neck. We see it in the combined irrational and malicious terrorists we are currently fighting. That is why the only rational response to Zarqawi was his death in the field of battle. Bush understands that and presses forward. In Catholic terms, it's called the right of self-defense.

In contrast, the Democrats are stuck in the year 1970 or 1971. It is utterly amazing to see the spectacle of John Kerry still stuck in those years. He just can't process reality. If anyone thinks that the nation will trust the vacuous Democrats with fighting the war on Islamist terrorism, then he is betting that the nation as a whole has also become irrational. Let's hope not.

Great leaders like Bush do not appease the unappeasable. Appeasement may be fine for pleasing the harmless, old eccentric relative; but it is self-destructive in the face of the irrational and malicious. Appeasement also points to an equally serious problem in the appeaser. The appeaser never learns from experience. The appeaser keeps assuming that the unappeasable side is rational, lucid, and well-intentioned, in spite of clear accumulated evidence of the opposite reality. That attitude is, to me, the definition of cowardice: the inability to face the reality of evil in the world and to act prudently and rationally in response.

The inability to face the reality of evil points to a lack of faith. Faith can handle evil because faith trusts in the God who guarantees the final victory over evil. It seems to me that those most prone to appeasement are those who want to wish away and deny the reality of evil because they fear the victory of evil. That is why, even in daily life, we find individuals who spend years appeasing terrible associates and even family members, to the detriment of all involved. We find women, especially, going from one demeaning, sexually exploitive relation to another because they don't believe there is anything better. Let me be clear again: the Christian is under no obligation to appease anyone. The Christian obligation is to do good. The best favor that a Christian can do to those on the wrong track is to say no and stop them in their tracks. The tragic vein of appeasement runs right through our human experience from great matters of state to the ordinary relationships of daily life. If we really believe that God is good and guarantees the victory of good, then we challenge the irrational and the malicious, whether they come in the form of a foreign terrorist or in the more banal form of the exploitive and irrational individuals we all come across in daily life. Character comes from saying no to the unappeasable. Character comes from trusting that the good God will take care of the outcome. Remember that one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is fortitude. I have never found appeasement on the list.

Monday, May 29, 2006

President Bush at West Point

Here is the text of President Bush's speech on May 27, 2006, at the West Point commencement. I present the text on Memorial Day as another means of presenting the President's views unfiltered by the hostile liberal media. You can also find the text at www.whitehouse.gov. By the way, for those curious, I fully endorse the President's speech. Here it is, with bold highlighting by me:

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you for the warm welcome. General Lennox, Secretary Harvey, members of the United States Congress, Academy staff and faculty, distinguished guests, proud family, and, most importantly, the Class of 2006. (Applause.)

President George W. Bush delivers the commencement speech Saturday, May 27, 2006, to the 2006 graduating class of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, in West Point, N.Y. "The field of battle is where your degree and commission will take you, " the President told the graduates. "This is the first class to arrive at West Point after the attacks of September the 11th, 2001. Each of you came here in a time of war, knowing all the risks and dangers that come with wearing our nation's uniform. And I want to thank you for your patriotism, your devotion to duty, your courageous decision to serve. America is grateful and proud of the men and women of West Point."  White House photo by Shealah Craighead On the way in, General Lennox showed me what you did to his car. (Laughter.) I told him, "That's a fine looking vehicle -- (laughter) -- but you need to stay away from Marine One." (Laughter.)

I see a lot of Gray Hogs out there -- a few Century Men, too. During your four years at this Academy, I'm told there are about 18,000 opportunities to be late for class, drill, march, or inspection -- and many of you availed yourselves of those opportunities. (Laughter.) Others got written up just for having bad haircuts. No matter what reason you got slugged, help is on the way. (Applause.) In keeping with longstanding tradition, I hereby absolve all cadets who are on restriction for minor conduct offenses. I leave it to General Lennox to define exactly what "minor" means. (Laughter.)

It's a privilege to stand before the future leaders of the United States Army. (Applause.) You have worked hard to get to this moment. You survived the hardest Beast on record -- the "best summer of your lives" in Buckistan -- countless hours in the House of Pane. In four years, you've been transformed from "bean-heads" to "yuks," to "cows," and "Firsties." And today you will become proud officers of the greatest Army in the history of the world. (Applause.) Your teachers are proud of you; your parents are proud of you; and so is your Commander-in-Chief. Congratulations on a fantastic achievement. (Applause.)

This Academy has shaped your minds and bodies for the challenges that lie ahead. You worked hard in the classroom and on the playing field to prepare for the rigors of combat. One cadet described the West Point attitude this way: "First I'll beat Navy and Air Force, and then I'll beat the enemies of freedom on the battlefield."

The field of battle is where your degree and commission will take you. This is the first class to arrive at West Point after the attacks of September the 11th, 2001. Each of you came here in a time of war, knowing all the risks and dangers that come with wearing our nation's uniform. And I want to thank you for your patriotism, your devotion to duty, your courageous decision to serve. America is grateful and proud of the men and women of West Point. (Applause.)

President George W. Bush presents a diploma to class valedictorian Jessamyn Jade Liu during 2006 graduation ceremonies Saturday, May 27, 2006, at the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, N.Y.  White House photo by Shealah Craighead The reality of war has surrounded you since your first moments at this Academy. More than 50 of your fellow cadets here at West Point have already seen combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. And 34 times since your class arrived, you have observed a moment of silence in Washington Hall to honor a former cadet fallen in the war on terror. Each loss is heartbreaking -- and each loss has made you even more determined to pick up their mantle, to carry on their fight, and to achieve victory. We will honor the memory of these brave souls. We will finish the task for which they gave their lives. We will complete the mission. (Applause.)

West Point has adapted to prepare you for the war you're about to enter. Since the attacks of September the 11th, 2001, this Academy has established a new Combating Terrorism Center, a new minor in Terrorism Studies, with new courses in counter-insurgency operations, intelligence, and homeland security, and winning the peace. West Point has expanded Arabic language training, has hired new faculty with expertise in Islamic law and culture, brought in members of the 101st and 82nd Airborne to train you and share their experiences on the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan. And each of you endured grueling Saturday training events where you practiced identifying IEDs, conducting convoy operations and running checkpoints. By changing to meet the new threats, West Point has given you the skills you will need in Afghanistan and Iraq -- and for the long war with Islamic radicalism that will be the focus of much of your military careers.

This Academy went through a similar period of change six decades ago, at the end of World War II. Some of West Point's greatest graduates -- men like Eisenhower and Bradley, Patton and MacArthur -- had just brought our nation victory in Europe and Japan. Yet, almost immediately, a new threat appeared on the horizon -- the threat of Imperial Communism. And West Point, like America, had to prepare for a long struggle with a new adversary, one that would require the determination of generations of Americans.

In the early years of that struggle, freedom's victory was not obvious or assured. In 1947, communist forces were threatening Greece and Turkey, the reconstruction of Germany was faltering, mass starvation was setting in across Europe. In 1948, Czechoslovakia fell to communism; France and Italy appeared to be headed for the same fate, and Berlin was blockaded on the orders of Josef Stalin. In 1949, the Soviet Union exploded a nuclear weapon, giving our new enemy the ability to bring catastrophic destruction to our homeland. And weeks later, communist forces won their revolution in China, and claimed the world's most populous nation for communism. And in the summer of 1950, seven North Korean divisions poured across the border into South Korea, marking the start of the first direct military clash of the Cold War. All of this took place in just the first five years following World War II.

Graduates of the U.S. Military Academy take part in the traditional hat toss Saturday, May 27, 2006, after commencement ceremonies in West Point, N.Y. President George W. Bush delivered the commencement speech to the 861 Cadets.  White House photo by Shealah Craighead Fortunately, we had a President named Harry Truman, who recognized the threat, took bold action to confront it, and laid the foundation for freedom's victory in the Cold War.

President Truman set a clear doctrine. In a speech to Congress, he called for military and economic aid to Greece and Turkey, and announced a new doctrine that would guide American policy throughout the Cold War. He told the Congress: "It must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures." With this new doctrine, and with the aid to back it up, Greece and Turkey were saved from communism, and the Soviet expansion into Southern Europe and the Middle East was stopped.

President Truman acted boldly to confront new adversaries. When Stalin tested America's resolve with a blockade of Berlin, President Truman launched the Berlin Airlift, delivering supplies to the besieged city, forcing the Red Army to back down, and securing the freedom of West Berlin. Later, Truman again responded to communist aggression with resolve, fighting a difficult war in Korea. The Korean War saw many setbacks, and missteps and terrible losses. More than 54,000 Americans gave their lives in Korea. Yet, in the end, communist forces were pushed back to the 38th Parallel -- and the freedom of South Korea was secure.

President Truman acted boldly to help transform old adversaries into democratic allies. In Asia, his administration led the effort to help Japan change from a nation that had launched a surprise attack on America into a thriving democracy and a steadfast ally. In Europe, he launched the Marshall Plan, an unprecedented effort to help Germany and other nations in Europe recover from war and establish strong democracies. The Marshall Plan cost about $100 billion in today's dollars, and it helped to save Western Europe from Soviet tyranny, and led to the emergence of democratic allies that remain indispensable to the cause of peace today.

President Truman transformed our alliances to deal with new dangers. After World War II, he led the effort to form the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the first peacetime alliance in American history. NATO served as a military bulwark against communist aggression, and helped give us a Europe that is now whole, free, and at peace.

President Truman positioned U.S. forces to deal with new threats. Despite enormous pressure to bring our troops home after World War II, he kept American forces in Germany to deter Soviet aggression, and kept U.S. forces in Japan as a counterweight to communist China. Together with the deployment of U.S. forces to Korea, the military footprint Truman established on two continents has remained virtually unchanged to this day, and has served as the foundation for security in Europe and in the Pacific.

President Truman launched a sweeping reorganization of the federal government to prepare it for a new struggle. Working with Congress, he created the Department of Defense, established the Air Force as a separate military service, formed the National Security Council at the White House, and founded the Central Intelligence Agency to ensure America had the best intelligence on Soviet threats.

President Truman made clear that the Cold War was an ideological struggle between tyranny and freedom. At a time when some still wanted to wish away the Soviet threat, he brought Winston Churchill to Missouri, to deliver his famous "Iron Curtain" speech. And he issued a presidential directive called NSC-68, which declared that America faced an enemy "animated by a new fanatic faith" and determined to impose its ideology on the entire world. This directive called on the United States to accept the responsibility of world leadership, and defend the cause of freedom and democracy -- and that's exactly what the United States did.

By the actions he took, the institutions he built, the alliances he forged and the doctrines he set down, President Truman laid the foundations for America's victory in the Cold War. As President Truman put it towards the end of his presidency, "When history says that my term of office saw the beginning of the Cold War, it will also say that in those eight years we set the course that can win it." His leadership paved the way for subsequent Presidents from both political parties -- men like Eisenhower and Kennedy and Reagan -- to confront and eventually defeat the Soviet threat. (Applause.)

Today, at the start of a new century, we are again engaged in a war unlike any our nation has fought before -- and like Americans in Truman's day, we are laying the foundations for victory. (Applause.) The enemies we face today are different in many ways from the enemy we faced in the Cold War. In the Cold War, we deterred Soviet aggression through a policy of mutually assured destruction. Unlike the Soviet Union, the terrorist enemies we face today hide in caves and shadows -- and emerge to attack free nations from within. The terrorists have no borders to protect, or capital to defend. They cannot be deterred -- but they will be defeated. (Applause.) America will fight the terrorists on every battlefront, and we will not rest until this threat to our country has been removed. (Applause.)

While there are real differences between today's war and the Cold War, there are also many important similarities. Like the Cold War, we are fighting the followers of a murderous ideology that despises freedom, crushes all dissent, has territorial ambitions, and pursues totalitarian aims. Like the Cold War, our enemies are dismissive of free peoples, claiming that men and women who live in liberty are weak and lack the resolve to defend our way of life. Like the Cold War, our enemies believe that the innocent can be murdered to serve a political vision. And like the Cold War, they're seeking weapons of mass murder that would allow them to deliver catastrophic destruction to our country. If our enemies succeed in acquiring such weapons, they will not hesitate to use them, which means they would pose a threat to America as great as the Soviet Union.

Against such an enemy, there is only one effective response: We will never back down, we will never give in, and we will never accept anything less than complete victory. (Applause.)

Like previous generations, history has once again called America to great responsibilities, and we're answering history's call with confidence. We're confronting new dangers with new determination, and laying the foundations for victory in the war on terror.

In this new war, we have set a clear doctrine. After the attacks of September the 11th, I told a joint session of Congress: America makes no distinction between the terrorists and the countries that harbor them. If you harbor a terrorist, you are just as guilty as the terrorists and you're an enemy of the United States of America. (Applause.) In the months that followed, I also made clear the principles that will guide us in this new war: America will not wait to be attacked again. We will confront threats before they fully materialize. We will stay on the offense against the terrorists, fighting them abroad so we do not have to face them here at home. (Applause.)

In this new war, we have acted boldly to confront new adversaries. When the Taliban regime in Afghanistan tested America's resolve, refusing our just demands to turn over the terrorists who attacked America, we responded with determination. Coalition forces drove the Taliban from power, liberated Afghanistan, and brought freedom to 25 million people. (Applause.) In Iraq, another tyrant chose to test America's resolve. Saddam Hussein was a dictator who had pursued and used weapons of mass destruction, he sponsored terrorists, invaded his neighbors, abused his people, deceived international inspectors, and refused to comply with more than a dozen United Nations resolutions. (Applause.) When the United Nations Security Council gave him one final chance to disclose and disarm, or face serious consequences, he refused to take that final opportunity. So coalition forces went into Iraq and removed his cruel regime. And today, Iraq's former dictator is on trial for his crimes -- and America and the world are better off because Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. (Applause.)

In this new war, we have helped transform old adversaries into democratic allies. Just as an earlier generation of Americans helped change Germany and Japan from conquered adversaries into democratic allies, today a new generation of Americans is helping Iraq and Afghanistan recover from the ruins of tyranny. In Afghanistan, the terror camps have been shut down, women are working, boys and girls are going to school, and Afghans have chosen a president and a new parliament in free elections. In Iraq, the people defied the terrorists and cast their ballots in three free elections last year. And last week, Iraqis made history when they inaugurated the leaders of a new government of their choosing, under a constitution that they drafted and they approved. When the formation of this unity -- with the formation of this unity government, the world has seen the beginning of something new: a constitutional democracy in the heart of the Middle East. (Applause.) Difficult challenges remain in both Afghanistan and Iraq. But America is safer, and the world is more secure, because these two countries are now democracies -- and they are allies in the cause of freedom and peace. (Applause.)

In this new war, we have forged new alliances, and transformed old ones, for the challenges of a new century. After our nation was attacked, we formed the largest coalition in history to fight the war on terror. More than 90 nations are cooperating in a global campaign to dry up terrorist financing, to hunt down terrorist operatives, and bring terrorist leaders to justice. Nations like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia that once turned a blind eye to terror are now helping lead the fight against it. And since September the 11th, 2001, our coalition has captured or killed al Qaeda managers and operatives in over two dozen countries, and disrupted a number of serious al Qaeda terrorist plots, including plots to attack targets inside the United States. Our nation is more secure because we have rallied the world to confront this threat to civilization. (Applause.)

The greatest threat we face is the danger of terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction. To confront this danger, we launched the Proliferation Security Initiative, a coalition of more than 70 nations that are working together to stop shipments of weapons of mass destruction on land, at sea, and in the air, and to stop them from falling into terrorist hands. And building on the legacy of Harry Truman, we launched the most dramatic transformation of the NATO Alliance since its founding in 1949. Working with allies, we created a new "NATO Response Force" that will allow NATO to deploy rapid reaction forces on short notice anywhere in the world. And together we transformed NATO from a defensive alliance focused on protecting Europe from Soviet tank invasion into a dynamic alliance that is now operating across the world in the support of democracy and peace.

For five decades, NATO forces never deployed outside of Europe. Today, NATO is leading security operations in Afghanistan, training Iraqi security forces in Baghdad, delivering humanitarian relief to earthquake victims in Pakistan, and training peacekeepers in Sudan. An alliance some said had lost its purpose after the Cold War is now meeting the challenges of the 21st century.

In this new war, we're positioning our forces to meet new threats. For more than half a century, American forces essentially had remained in the same places that President Truman deployed them. So, two years ago, I announced the largest transformation of our global force posture since the start of the Cold War. Over the coming decade, we will move U.S. forces from Cold War garrisons in Europe and Asia, and reposition them so they can surge quickly to trouble spots anywhere. We will deploy advanced military capabilities that will increase U.S. combat power across the world, while bringing home between 60,000 and 70,000 troops now stationed overseas. By taking these steps, we will reduce stress on our military families, raise the pressure on our enemies, and ensure that when you put on the uniform of the United States Army you are ready to meet any threat. (Applause.)

In this new war, we've undertaken the most sweeping reorganization of the federal government since the start of the Cold War. We created a new Department of Homeland Security, merging 22 different government organizations into a single department with a clear mission: to protect America from future attacks. We created the new Director of National Intelligence, which has led a broad restructuring of our nation's intelligence agencies for the threats of the 21st century. We have transformed the FBI into an agency whose primary focus is stopping terrorism, and reorganized the Department of Justice to help us meet this new threat. We passed the Patriot Act, which broke down barriers that prevented law enforcement and intelligence agencies from sharing vital information on terrorist threats.

At the Department of Defense, we created a new Northern Command responsible for homeland defense, a new Strategic Command responsible for defending America against long-range attacks. We transformed the Special Operations Command, more than doubling its budget, adding thousands of new troops, and making it the lead command in the global war on terror. And we're undertaking the largest transformation of the Army in more than a hundred years. Since the turn of the last century, the Army has been organized around the division structure designed by Napoleon. Today, we're replacing that division structure with a 21st century Army built around "modular" brigade combat teams that will be interchangeable and available to work for any division commander. These brigades will make our Army faster and lighter, and more agile and more lethal -- and it will make you more effective in the defense of freedom. (Applause.)

We have made clear that the war on terror is an ideological struggle between tyranny and freedom. When President Truman spoke here for the 150th anniversary of West Point, he told the Class of 1952: "We can't have lasting peace unless we work actively and vigorously to bring about conditions of freedom and justice in the world." That same principle continues to guide us in today's war on terror. Our strategy to protect America is based on a clear premise: The security of our nation depends on the advance of liberty in other nations. On September the 11th, 2001, we saw that problems originating in a failed and oppressive state 7,000 miles away could bring murder and destruction to our country. And we learned an important lesson: Decades of excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe. (Applause.) So long as the Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place where terrorists foment resentment and threaten American security.

So we are pursuing a forward strategy of freedom in the Middle East. I believe the desire for liberty is universal -- and by standing with democratic reformers across a troubled region, we will extend freedom to millions who have not known it -- and lay the foundation of peace for generations to come. (Applause.)

We're still in the early stages of this struggle for freedom and, like those first years of the Cold War, we've seen setbacks, and challenges, and days that have tested America's resolve. Yet we've also seen days of victory and hope. We've seen people in Afghanistan voting for the first democratic parliament in a generation. We have seen jubilant Iraqis dancing in the streets, holding up ink-stained fingers, celebrating their freedom. We've seen people in Lebanon waving cedar flags and securing the liberty and independence of their land. We've seen people in Kyrgyzstan drive a corrupt regime from power and vote for democratic change. In the past four years alone, more than 110 million human beings across the world have joined the ranks of the free -- and this is only the beginning. (Applause.) The message has spread from Damascus to Tehran that the future belongs to freedom -- and we will not rest until the promise of liberty reaches every people and every nation. (Applause.)

Now the Class of 2006 will enter the great struggle -- and the final outcome depends on your leadership. The war began on my watch -- but it's going to end on your watch. (Applause.) Your generation will bring us victory in the war on terror. My call to you is this: Trust in the power of freedom, and be bold in freedom's defense. Show leadership and courage -- and not just on the battlefield. Take risk, try new things, and challenge the established way of doing things. Trust in your convictions, stay true to yourselves -- and one day the world will celebrate your achievements. (Applause.)

I have confidence in the final outcome of this struggle, because I know the character and determination of the men and women gathered before me. We see that character and determination in a cadet named Patrick Dowdell. It was Patrick's dream to attend West Point, and he applied straight out of high school, but did not get in on his first try. After being turned down, he wondered if he was cut out for the Academy. His father, New York Fireman Kevin Dowdell, encouraged Patrick to apply again. Kevin wrote letters to his congressman on behalf of his son. And he spent long hours working with Patrick on his application -- right up to September the 9, 2001. Two days later, Kevin Dowdell raced across the Brooklyn Bridge with his fire rescue unit to the burning World Trade Towers -- and he never returned.

After the attack, Patrick spent months digging at Ground Zero, looking for his dad -- and thinking about the dream that they had shared about his future. He was determined to fulfill that dream. And in the summer of 2002, Patrick arrived here at West Point as a new cadet -- and today he will receive his degree and his commission. (Applause.)

A few weeks ago, Patrick's mom, RoseEllen, attended another graduation ceremony -- at the New York City Fire Academy, where her other son, James, followed his father's footsteps as one of New York's Bravest. And today, RoseEllen -- (applause) -- is with us to see Patrick join the ranks of America's bravest, as an officer in the United States Army. (Applause.)

We live in freedom because young Americans like Patrick, and all the cadets here today, have stepped forward to serve. You have chosen a difficult and dangerous vocation -- and America is grateful for that choice. Today, you will accept a sacred trust: You will lead America's sons and daughters on the battlefield in a time of war. Our nation is counting on you as we count on no other group of young leaders in our country. The last four years have tested you in ways you never imagined -- and you leave here well prepared for the challenges you will face.

There's a saying at West Point that much of the history you teach here was made by the people you taught here. Now the Class of 2006 will leave for the battlefield -- and you will make history. Never falter, never quit. Bring honor to the uniform, and pride to your country. May God bless you, and the Class of 2006. (Applause.)


Saturday, September 24, 2005

Thank You, President Bush.

Genevieve Kineke (Feminine Genius) reminds us to thank our President:

For those who wonder about the good effects of a pro-life president, see the good news about the US refusing to fund the UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund) which supports China's mandatory abortion and sterilisation program. This is the fourth year in a row that the administration has made the same decision . . .

Genevieve directs our attention to a current article in the current issue of Time magazine on China's involvement in a brutal campaign of forced abortions and sterilizations.

LifeSiteNews has more on the story:

The White House has once again denied the controversial United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) financial backing – for the fourth year running, despite assurances from the UNFPA that it is not involved in coercive abortion in China. The UNFPA would normally receive $34 million; instead, $25 million will be redirected to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

US law prohibits the country from contributing to any organization that participates in coercive abortion – a practice widely acknowledged in Communist-ruled China. Despite alleging that they have no participation in this practice – as a press release from the UN dated today claims – other groups continue to document evidence that the UNFPA is directly involved in funding and aiding China’s coerced abortion program.

The United States refuses to fund the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) based on its U.S. Department of State investigations. Last December Arthur Dewey, the U.S. assistant secretary of State for the bureau of population, refugees, and migration made a presentation to the House International Relations Committee, stating that “UNFPA support of, and participation in, China's population-planning activities allows the Chinese government to implement more effectively its program of coercive abortion, thus triggering the Kemp-Kasten prohibition on support to any organization that supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.” The result has been that the United States has not funded UNFPA during the past three years. . . .

The move earned the praise of Catholic congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ).

Readers might recall that President Bush's principled refusal to fund abortions was a source of conflict in the 2004 presidential race, with Senator Kerry promising to restore full funding to the U.N. program.

Tuesday, July 05, 2005

"Bush, a Friend of Africa"

So says Nicholas Kristof, Op-Ed columnist over at the New York Times. In light of the highlighting of Africa at the G-8 summit here are some excerpts:

(1) But the fact is that Mr. Bush has done much more for Africa than Bill Clinton ever did, increasing the money actually spent for aid there by two- thirds so far, and setting in motion an eventual tripling of aid for Africa. Mr. Bush's crowning achievement was ending one war in Sudan, between north and south. And while Mr. Bush has done shamefully little to stop Sudan's other conflict - the genocide in Darfur - that's more than Mr. Clinton's response to genocide in Rwanda (which was to issue a magnificent apology afterward).

(2) ...The liberal approach to helping the poor is sometimes to sponsor a U.N. conference and give ringing speeches calling for changed laws and more international assistance.

In contrast, a standard conservative approach is to sponsor a missionary hospital or school. One magnificent example is the Addis Ababa Fistula Hospital, where missionary doctors repair obstetric injuries that have left Ethiopian women incontinent.

Liberals also often focus on changing laws, but in a poor country, the legal system is often irrelevant outside the capital. Sudan, for example, banned female genital mutilation back in 1957; since then, the practice has expanded steadily. Sure, lobbying for better laws is important, but it's usually much more cost-effective to vaccinate children or educate girls. Nobody gets more bang for the buck than missionary schools and clinics, and Christian aid groups like World Vision and Samaritan's Purse save lives at bargain-basement prices.

Liberals may also put too much faith in aid itself. What Africa needs most desperately are things it can itself provide: good governance, a firmer neighborhood response to genocide in Sudan, and a collective nudging of Robert Mugabe into retirement.

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

"Abortions rising under Bush? Not true," says FactCheck.Org

"Abortions rose under the Bush administration." You may have heard this cited by a few of of our "progressive" bloggers, not to mention Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, and Senator John Kerry. However, FactCheck.org says it's not true, publishing The Biography of a Bad Statistic:

A number of politicians and organizations have been circulating an interesting and surprising idea: that abortions have gone up under George W. Bush's watch.

The claim is repeated by supporters of abortion rights as evidence that Bush's anti-abortion policies have backfired, or at least been ineffective.

But the claim is untrue. In fact, according to the respected Alan Guttmacher Institute, a 20-year decline in abortion rates continued after Bush took office . . .GET THE WHOLE STORY.