A reprint of a New Republic article (a liberal periodical) written by > Martin Peretz, the eidtor in chief.>

Some quotes:>

"If George W. Bush were to discover a cure for cancer, his critics would > denounce him for having done it unilaterally, without adequate consultation, > with a crude disregard for the sensibilities of others. He pursued his goal > obstinately, they would say, without filtering his thoughts through the > medical research establishment. And he didn't share his research with > competing labs and thus caused resentment among other scientists who didn't > have the resources or the bold--perhaps even somewhat reckless--instincts­ to > pursue the task as he did. And he completely ignored the World Health > Organization, showing his contempt for international institutions. Anyway, a > cure for cancer is all fine and nice, but what about aids?>

No, the president has not discovered a cure for cancer. But there is a > pathology, a historical pathology, that he has attacked with unprecedented > vigor and with unprecedented success. I refer, of course, to the political > culture of the Middle East, which the president may actually have changed. > And he has accomplished this genuinely momentous transformation in ways that > virtually the entire foreign affairs clerisy--the cold-blooded Brent > Scowcroft realist Republicans and almost all the Democrats--never thought > possible. Or, perhaps, in ways some of them thought positively undesirable. > Bush, it now seems safe to say, is one of the great surprises in modern U.S. > history. Nothing about his past suggested that he harbored these ideals nor > the qualities of character required for their realization. Right up to the > moment Bush became president, I was convinced that his mind, at least on > matters Levantine, belonged to his father and to James Baker III, whose > worldview seemed to be defined by the pecuniary prejudice of oil and Texas: > Keep the ruling Arabs happy. But I was wrong, and, in light of what has > already been achieved in the Middle East, I am glad to say so. Most American > liberals, alas, enjoy no similar gladness. They are not exactly pleased by > the positive results of Bush's campaign in the Middle East. They deny and > resent and begrudge and snipe. They are trapped in the politics of > churlishness.>

It has been heartening, in recent months, to watch some Democratic senators > searching for ways out of the politics of churlishness. Some liberals appear > to have understood that history is moving swiftly and in a good direction, > and that history has no time for their old and mistaken suspicion of > American power in the service of American values. One does not have to > admire a lot about George W. Bush to admire what he has so far wrought. One > need only be a thoughtful American with an interest in proliferating > liberalism around the world. And, if liberals are unwilling to proliferate > liberalism, then conservatives will. Rarely has there been a sweeter irony. > ">

Looks like some folks are finally seeing the light.>