Skip to comments.
President Bush's First Win (NYT editorial)
The New York Times ^
| 09/17/2001
| The editors
Posted on 09/16/2001 9:33:54 PM PDT by Pokey78
New York City and George W. Bush were never a natural couple until last week. Now Mr. Bush has managed to reach out in ways both symbolic and practical. In its greatest hour of need, the city must be grateful that he rose to the occasion, and demonstrated that he is president of the entire country.
During the first days of this crisis, Mr. Bush could only build a foundation for a new kind of wartime presidency. There will be different challenges every week that will test his ability to lead the nation in a time of crisis. But his first responsibilities were to demonstrate his gravitas, and to comfort the people living at the sites of the terrorist attack. After a shaky start, his speech Friday at the National Cathedral struck the note of somber confidence that the nation was looking for. Later, in his trip to Manhattan, he succeeded in bonding with New York.
Mr. Bush is not generally a fan of big cities. His recent attempt to bill his vacation in Texas as a return to the real American values of the heartland seemed like a repudiation not only of Washington D.C., but urbanity in general. But like almost everyone else, he has been changed by the crisis. On Tuesday, as his security men flew him around the country, he reportedly insisted that he wanted to go "home" to Washington. If in the past he reflected the country's more Manhattan-phobic side, his ability to transcend those feelings represented its ability to unite.
Anyone who has watched the president over the last year would have been able to predict that his visit with the rescue workers at the World Trade Center site would be a success. Mr. Bush is never better than when he is standing in rough territory in work clothes, talking with working men and women with dirt on their hands. We were frankly less certain that he would show equal sympathy in Washington, when the time came to make a commitment to support the enormous task of beginning restoration of lower Manhattan.
But the president came through with a commitment that was as quick and as generous as this beleaguered city could have wished. The pleas from Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton high-profile Democrats who could not possibly be on the administration's list of favorite legislators were met in toto. The senators asked for $20 billion, and they got $20 billion, without hesitation.
In the days to come, some New Yorkers will no doubt have occasion to differ with the president on the decisions he makes, both political and diplomatic. But they will do so as members of the same American family. By his actions over the last week, Mr. Bush has won the first battle of the war.
TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 201-218 next last
Did someone kidnap dowd, Friedman, Rich et al?
1
posted on
09/16/2001 9:33:54 PM PDT
by
Pokey78
To: Pokey78
Even the RATS of the NYT are going to have to pretend they like W for a few days. This won't last.
To: Pokey78
After a shaky start Not on your life.
The armchair quarterbacks were the ones who didn't see how steady the President is.
3
posted on
09/16/2001 9:38:19 PM PDT
by
Ruth A.
To: Pokey78
This is in the New York Times? Are they trying to lower our guards through flattery?
4
posted on
09/16/2001 9:38:46 PM PDT
by
JeremyM
To: Pokey78
Methinks the stock in political correctness may very well plunge further than Dow Jones.
To: Pokey78
Yet one more example of egomaniac (and always wrong) liberal editorialists claiming Bush has changed to meet their standards, instead of them no longer being able to deny he has been a true leader and man of character all along. Screw em all. Bush has never needed them, and he sure as heck doesn't now.
6
posted on
09/16/2001 9:40:48 PM PDT
by
Rokke
To: Pokey78
They may be dumb but they're not stupid. They know that their usual leftist rhetoric would be career suicide at this point. Problem for them is that they don't know anything else. Oh well--been nice knowin' ya....not.
7
posted on
09/16/2001 9:41:01 PM PDT
by
randog
To: Pokey78
uh, the NYT is writing something good about Bush?
8
posted on
09/16/2001 9:42:25 PM PDT
by
rb22982
To: ozzymandus
Even the RATS of the NYT are going to have to pretend they like W for a few days. This won't last.Yes. They've done their good deed for the week. Soon they can go back to making sure (in a very cultured and intelligent way of course) that Bush doesn't get too big for his boots.
9
posted on
09/16/2001 9:43:46 PM PDT
by
syriacus
To: Pokey78
As I said last week....the red zone is getting bigger.
To: Ruth A.
The armchair quarterbacks were the ones who didn't see how steady the President is. Bush43 reminds me of a steam locomotive starting. Starts off kinda slow, without much apparent movement, builds up slowly, but steadily -- then takes off powerfully.
To: Pokey78
The NYT's have been trying to slow the President and mostly trying to trip him up, but mostly just bashing him, But NOW!!! as most of us predicted, THEY ARE FOLLOWING HIM because George W. Bush is a LEADER
12
posted on
09/16/2001 9:45:48 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
To: Rokke
"Yet one more example of egomaniac (and always wrong) liberal editorialists claiming Bush has changed to meet their standards, instead of them no longer being able to deny he has been a true leader and man of character all along." Perhaps, it is they who are "growing"...
13
posted on
09/16/2001 9:50:36 PM PDT
by
okie01
To: MJY1288
I don't like the tone of their editorial.... is he up to the job....?.....well so far. GTH, NYT.
14
posted on
09/16/2001 9:51:08 PM PDT
by
onyx
To: Pokey78
Bush's first win was the election.
To: ozzymandus
16
posted on
09/16/2001 9:55:16 PM PDT
by
Bogie
To: onyx
That is true, but you must remember this is the NYT's. What the real story should be is "Mainstream media has had it all wrong about W"
17
posted on
09/16/2001 9:55:51 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
To: syriacus
At least they're more cunning than the other leftist RATS like the school that wouldn't allow kids to wear the flag, or the company that forbade it's employees from displaying the flag, or the nut-groups like ramsey (ramses) clark organizing anti-American protests. The NYT is cagey enough to pretend to be patriotic for a few days.
To: diotima
FYI
19
posted on
09/16/2001 9:57:05 PM PDT
by
Lizzy W
To: Pokey78
President Bush did not change, New York did. Some of us knew all along what he was made of, now a few others see it too. I do not trust them to continue this new found respect for long, however, it would go against their political agenda.
The difference is now when they bash him, they might feel a little bit of guilt!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 201-218 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson