Bush’s Beginning
An era’s ending.

Mr. George is an editorial writer for the New York Post.
September 21, 2001 1:20 p.m.

n a remarkable egalitarian and sweeping manner, President George W. Bush's speech Thursday (more a declaration of national purpose than a formal declaration of war) signaled a beginning and an ending.

It was a beginning in that he clearly outlined the goals of the coming struggle and rallied Americans to his cause. "Tonight, we are a country awakened to danger and called to defend freedom. Our grief has turned to anger, and anger to resolution. Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done."

As written (most likely by chief speechwriter Michael Gerson), it was one of the finest presidential addresses ever. The artifice of casting it as a "State of the Union" was appropriate and effective.

Even better this was a summoning that brought Americans together, rather than driving them apart. As he campaigned, Bush was "uniter, not a divider." Given that our foes use their allegiance to one of the world's great religions as a motivating force, it is important that the United States avoid falling into the trap of making war on Islam. A Muslim cleric was appropriately positioned in the audience. He referred to the religion's teachings as "peaceful."

Bush clearly stated that America, seeking to defend its principles and its beliefs, will not be the new Crusaders trying to make the world safe for Christianity. No, but we will make the world safe from those who would kill and maim civilians.

But in meeting the gravity of the occasion, George W. Bush also signaled an ending. This was the ending of banal rhetoric in the service of purely political ends. In other words, this was the end of Clintonism and the deceptive and angry words the era represented.

"We will rally the world to this cause, by our efforts and by our courage. We will not tire, we will not falter, we will not fail." In those words, Bush speaks to the responsibilities of the entire nation. He is confident that Americans can continue on even though our confidence might be momentarily shaken.

He follows that up with a personal promise of his own. Displaying the badge of police officer George Howard, given to him by Howard's mother, he declared, "I will not forget this wound to our country, or those who inflicted it. I will not yield, I will not rest. I will not relent in waging this struggle for the freedom and security of the American people."

This is something of a bargain. Bush puts forth what is expected of the ordinary citizen — he asks for "patience." But he also declares that he is going to work hard, perhaps harder than he ever has before to achieve this goal.

How could the man who asked what the meaning of "is" is, have ever delivered those words? What meaning would they have had?

Would even Clinton pal Tony Blair believe the former president if he declared to the Taliban that there would be no room for negotiation on the terms of surrendering Osama bin Laden? Of course not.

Ironically, it's because words don't come so easily to Bush, that when they do come forward, we are forced to listen to them that much more closely. We know that he believes what he is saying as truth without a dissembling thought behind them.

Bill Clinton may have been the perfect president for the era of "reality TV." But George W. Bush is the president the nation needs once "reality" itself returns.

And apropos of that, the culture itself is suddenly challenged by September's nasty surprise. There may be very well be an ending — or at the very least a truce — in the Culture Wars. Wednesday, the Department of Defense announced that "Don't ask, don't tell" was being suspended for the time being. That is to say, all military discharges — for whatever reason — are in abeyance for the duration. The time has come, it seems, to make war, not love.

And then there is the new "Secretary of Homeland Security." As a Vietnam vet, Gov. Tom Ridge is the perfect choice for the job. On the other hand, depending on how he performs his job over the next three years, he will be ideally suited to become an alternative for Bush should Cheney prove — or appear — too unhealthy to run for a second term. Even though we are in a war period, politics continues (those who doubt should look up FDR and his three vice-presidents). Pennsylvania will still be an electorally rich state three years from now. Ridge's pro-choice views eliminated him as a V.P. candidate in 2000.

But that was then.