A Study in Contrasts

I don’t have much to say about President Bush’s inauguration today. It is what it is, and frankly I don’t feel like picking a fight with anybody right now. I’m also trying to put aside some of the negativity that has dogged my thinking over the past couple of years (more for the sake of my own mental health and blood pressure numbers than because I’ve changed my mind about anything) and part of this effort is a conscious decision to limit my political ranting here in this space.
Nevertheless, I would like to quickly point out two articles that grabbed my attention this morning. What I find interesting about them is the sharp difference in attitudes they show between those who are staying on the White House staff and those who are leaving.

The first article, a Washington Post essay that reports on the Administration’s attitude since the election, notes that “President Bush and his Cabinet nominees have been sending a firm message as they kick off a second term: no mistakes, no regret, no comment.” (Registration required if you want to read the whole article. Sorry. WaPo is that way…)
Contrast that with the words of outgoing Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who says in an interview for an Australian paper, that he is “disappointed that Iraq hasn’t turned out better. And that we weren’t able to move forward more meaningfully in the Middle East peace process… [and] that we didn’t stop 9/11. And then in the wake of 9/11, instead of redoubling what is our traditional export of hope and optimism we exported our fear and our anger. And presented a very intense and angry face to the world. I regret that a lot.”

Make of this what you will. I know what I think about it, and how I feel about the fact that the folks running the show are apparently not willing to engage in any sort of self-reflection. Maybe that doesn’t matter these days, and maybe the voters actually prefer it this way. But like I said, I find the contrast interesting…

spacer