David Brooks reads too much into the Inaugural Address

In his Jan. 22nd Op-Ed in the NYT, David Brooks writes:

"But Bush's speech, which is being derided for its vagueness and its supposed detachment from the concrete realities, will still be practical and present in the world, yielding consequences every day.

With that speech, President Bush's foreign policy doctrine transcended the war on terror. He laid down a standard against which everything he and his successors do will be judged.

When he goes to China, he will not be able to ignore the political prisoners there, because he called them the future leaders of their free nation. When he meets with dictators around the world, as in this flawed world he must, he will not be able to have warm relations with them, because he said no relations with tyrants can be successful.

His words will be thrown back at him and at future presidents. American diplomats have been sent a strong message. Political reform will always be on the table. Liberation and democratization will be the ghost present at every international meeting. Vladimir Putin will never again be the possessor of that fine soul; he will be the menace to democracy and rule of law. "

Note: Not thus far, not today, and probably not ever Mr. Brooks. To assert that Bush's address signaled the current Administration's desire and plan is primarily to encourage and support universal freedoms around the world, oppose authoritarian and tyranical governments, and support the right of all nations to select their own form of self-government would be a 180 degree turnabout in their actions and expressed policies during the past four years.

This is readily apparent: from the unlawful detention of "enemy combattants", to prohibitions against "gay marriage", legal limitations on access to abortion, restrictions on presentations of condom usage in family planning and AIDS prevention, active participation in efforts to de-stabilize the presidency of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, not to mention the illegal wars waged against Afganistan and Iraq. America under GW Bush has failed to play any significant role against the murderous regimes in the Congo, Darfur, or Zimbabwe. At the same time, this Administration has cozied up to Musharif in Pakistan, to Putin in Russia, to Sharon in Israel, Fox in Mexico, and Mubarak in Egypt, while Abbas and Chavez get the cold shoulder.

Are they now going to gently coax Saudia Arabia to do away with the religious police, or threaten to unleash airstrikes against nuclear sites in Iran? Gently prod democratic reforms for Russia, or tighten the economic embargo against Cuba?

Mr. Bush's address is, in short, a chimera, a jingoistic hoax packaged and delivered for the benefit of those enamored of his presidencial "leadership". Mr. Brooks sees a dichotomy in the goings-on in Washington during the Inauguration between the profane and the ideal. To assert that Pres. Bush's second term will embrace the ideals of the founding fathers in terms of freedom, liberty, justice, tolerance, and respect for the rights of citizens around the world to freely select their own form of representative government is to ignore reality, and history. Unfortunately Mr. Brooks continues to see the glass as half full or better, when it is patently obvious it's almost empty thanks in large measure to the foolish actions of the glass keeper.