I have just read the transacript of George W. Bush's Inaugural address. Unbelievable! A dangerous left-winger in the White House!
Seriously, it is hard to know what to make of it.
If Bush is serious, the US will oppose every nation but one or two (Canada, Costa Rica?) in our hemisphere, every nation but one (South Africa) in Africa, many nations in eastern Europe including Russia, China and most Asian nations (though not India) and...well, you get the idea.
Given Bush's corporate sponsorship, I think we can dismiss out of hand the
idea that the United States will, in fact, crusade for freedom and against tyranny.
But then, why this speech? There are two possibilities - one, that the President is honestly idealistic in the Wilsonian sense. (Wilson, you remember, got us into World War I and then helped construct a "peace" that pretty much guaranteed a second World War.)
Delusion, I call that, and yes, it is possible that Bush is self-deluded.
Or, alternatively, that he is cynical.
As I ponder the question - self-deluded or cynical - I will try to remember what actors know, that villains do not think they are bad guys. And what I have learned in lying and being lied to over the years, that liars most often persuade themselves of the truth of their fabrications before uttering them.
While I mull the question it is only fair to note that the Inaugural speech reflects a retroactive honesty on the President's part.
We went into Iraq because he was persuaded by neo-conservative advisers both dark and ignorantly idealistic that we could thereby change the course of events in the Mideast for the better.
Fearful of telling us that, Bush and friends invented and/or elaborated cover stories. Thanks to UN inspections (!), there were no WMD. And as the Commission told us, Saddam did not collaborate in the murders of 9/11.
The cover stories served their purpose, though. Amplified by a compliant news machine, these stories persuaded many Americans that our attack on Iraq was payback for 9/11 and part of a single "war on terrorism."
Over time, though, the lies frayed. Enter the third rationale - bringing freedom to Iraqis. This wasn't quite the truth, but was certainly closer to the neo-con theory. And this Inaugural speech - announcing the nation's new role as exporter of freedom - builds on that last justification.
As such, it's as close to the truth as this Administration is likely to get.