Bush's Moral Clarity

There has been much handwringing among conservatives over President Bush's Middle East speech on Thursday, and much discussion over whether Bush: 1) capitulated entirely, 2) sent a mixed message, or 3) was almost Straussian in that his speech seemed to reassure Arabs when in reality it did not. Personally, I lean towards #2 as I just don't think of Bush as being all that subtle.

But for our Chron, the answer is: None of the Above!

The Chron finds Bush's speech to be edifying, a paragon of moral clarity:

However, it is incumbent on President Bush and his foreign policy advisers to make clear at all times what U.S. policy is, without wavering in their definition of who is a terrorist and what constitutes terrorism.

Bush's speech Thursday met that obligation.

HUH? The very best any serious commentator has been able to say about the speech is that it really is much better than it seemed. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. But it satisfies our Chron.

The same paper, I should add, that continues to describe Ken Lay as a "man of humble beginnings."

[Posted at 23:21 CST on 04/05/02] [Link]