Our President, George W. Bush
has the amazing ability, when addressing our nation, to sound as if he has practiced his speech a hundred times so as to get every syllable, each vowel and consonant pronounced clearly and correctly, and yet SIMULTANEOUSLY appear to be reading the words for the very first time and to be finding them . . . somewhat interesting . . . perhaps even understanding them . . . and (miracle of miracles, possibility of possibilities) PONDERING them.
I do not personally have any strong, absolutist political views (i.e. I'm not Anti-Bush, Pro-War, Anti-You, Pro-Me, etc), and I do not want to blandly attack the Commander-in-Chief as is the fashion in some sectors of society, but it is truly sad how the guy comes across as a moron. Perhaps this is why some countries, such as the Great Britain, have figureheads, especially Royal figureheads: a King or Queen whose job it is to appear powerful and majestic while representing their country, irregardless of which political faction is in charge of things at the moment.
On a somewhat related note, Helen Mirren is starring as Queen Elizabeth II in a new movie about the British Royal family's reaction to Princess Diana's death. Just a couple of months ago Sarianna & I watched Mirren portray Queen Elizabeth I in a made-for-HBO mini-series (I think the BBC was involved in the production in some capacity, and the film shown in England on the BBC). For one actress to act as both Queen Elizabeths in different movies must be quite an experience; both Queens are exceptional and historically important in very different, yet related, ways. Elizabeth I oversaw the creation of the Church of England and the Book of Common Prayer, which solved (more or less) the Protestant/Roman Catholic dilemma in England (the cause of many heads being separated from their respective necks); the Episcopal Church is now one of the largest Christian denominations in the world. Elizabeth I also strengthened England militarily and finally made it a European power on an equal footing with France and Spain: she oversaw the rise of England culturally as well as politically (Shakespeare wrote for Elizabeth's court). On the other hand, Elizabeth II, the current monarch, now presides over a slow drain of power from her family. Although they have only been figureheads for many years, with no actual legislative authority, Elizabeth must struggle to maintain the prestige of the Monarchy amidst the scandals of Princess Diana's death, Prince Charles' romantic ridiculousness and various mid-life crises (hey, it doesn't look like the poor guy's ever gonna get to be King, Mum just won't bite the dust) and Prince Harry's Nazi costume fun. Elizabeth I was the "Virgin Queen", while Elizabeth II is mother and grand-mother to a whole mess of sexually-confused men and women. And to top it all off the UK government finally made Elizabeth start paying income tax (I bet that equals up to a nice tidy sum every year). Interestingly, many of England's "Golden Periods" have coincided with the rules of female monarchs; the reigns of Elizabeth I, Anne and Victoria were all considered high points of British power and influence. I wonder how Elizabeth's current reign will be stacked up against her predecessors by history.
I do not personally have any strong, absolutist political views (i.e. I'm not Anti-Bush, Pro-War, Anti-You, Pro-Me, etc), and I do not want to blandly attack the Commander-in-Chief as is the fashion in some sectors of society, but it is truly sad how the guy comes across as a moron. Perhaps this is why some countries, such as the Great Britain, have figureheads, especially Royal figureheads: a King or Queen whose job it is to appear powerful and majestic while representing their country, irregardless of which political faction is in charge of things at the moment.
On a somewhat related note, Helen Mirren is starring as Queen Elizabeth II in a new movie about the British Royal family's reaction to Princess Diana's death. Just a couple of months ago Sarianna & I watched Mirren portray Queen Elizabeth I in a made-for-HBO mini-series (I think the BBC was involved in the production in some capacity, and the film shown in England on the BBC). For one actress to act as both Queen Elizabeths in different movies must be quite an experience; both Queens are exceptional and historically important in very different, yet related, ways. Elizabeth I oversaw the creation of the Church of England and the Book of Common Prayer, which solved (more or less) the Protestant/Roman Catholic dilemma in England (the cause of many heads being separated from their respective necks); the Episcopal Church is now one of the largest Christian denominations in the world. Elizabeth I also strengthened England militarily and finally made it a European power on an equal footing with France and Spain: she oversaw the rise of England culturally as well as politically (Shakespeare wrote for Elizabeth's court). On the other hand, Elizabeth II, the current monarch, now presides over a slow drain of power from her family. Although they have only been figureheads for many years, with no actual legislative authority, Elizabeth must struggle to maintain the prestige of the Monarchy amidst the scandals of Princess Diana's death, Prince Charles' romantic ridiculousness and various mid-life crises (hey, it doesn't look like the poor guy's ever gonna get to be King, Mum just won't bite the dust) and Prince Harry's Nazi costume fun. Elizabeth I was the "Virgin Queen", while Elizabeth II is mother and grand-mother to a whole mess of sexually-confused men and women. And to top it all off the UK government finally made Elizabeth start paying income tax (I bet that equals up to a nice tidy sum every year). Interestingly, many of England's "Golden Periods" have coincided with the rules of female monarchs; the reigns of Elizabeth I, Anne and Victoria were all considered high points of British power and influence. I wonder how Elizabeth's current reign will be stacked up against her predecessors by history.