You may or may not have heard the commentary by author Irshad Manji on NPR’s All Things Considered Monday afternoon. I listened to this person praise Bush’s diplomatic savvy because he sent a letter—or more importantly, didn’t send any troops—to Egypt to protest the imprisonment of a democratic activist, and I just had to drop them a line.

————————————————–

Dear ATC,

It was with some bemusement that I listened to Irshad Manji’s commentary lauding President Bush’s skills as a diplomat. Her assertion—and the evidence she used to support it—left a wry flavor in my mouth.

As I understand it, her contention is that the President proved his diplomatic mettle by sending the Egyptian government a letter of protest against the imprisonment of democratic activist Saad Ibrahim, along with a notice of a reduction of projected foreign aid to Egypt. This action, and the pleas from liberal Arabs that followed it, were the catalyst for Ibrahim’s retrial and subsequent release. From this she concludes, “Clearly, President Bush understands the value of exercising non-military power.”

So our President is a champion of diplomacy, simply because he elected not to invade another country when sending a letter would accomplish the same ends? This is the bare minimum I expect in the way of self-control from the leader of the world’s remaining superpower. Begging her pardon, but your commentator is truly damning him with faint praise.

If President Bush’s supporters have been reduced showcasing his merits via examples such as this, they are either grasping at straws or else showing a resurgence of the daffy hypertrophied optimism of the Reagan years. Perhaps it is Morning in America once again.

Andrew Lenzer (pronounced just as it reads)
Normandy Park, Washington