Certains ne savent pas vraiment comment r\u00e9agir apr\u00e8s la lecture de l’article du grand chef n\u00e9o-conservateur William Kristol, dans le Washington Post<\/em> du 15 juillet<\/a>. Nous connaissons la substance de la chose, puisque Kristol s’\u00e9tait d\u00e9j\u00e0<\/a> exprim\u00e9 sur la situation de l’Am\u00e9rique deux jours plus t\u00f4t sur CNN. Dans le Post<\/em>, il devient majestueux, puisqu’il \u00e9crit pour l’histoire, en nous annon\u00e7ant pourquoi, \u00e0 la fin de 2008, on pourra conclure que la pr\u00e9sidence Bush fut une grande pr\u00e9sidence :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abI suppose I’ll merely expose myself to harmless ridicule if I make the following assertion: George W. Bush’s presidency will probably be a successful one.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbLet’s step back from the unnecessary mistakes and the self-inflicted wounds that have characterized the Bush administration. Let’s look at the broad forest rather than the often unlovely trees. What do we see? First, no second terrorist attack on U.S. soil not something we could have taken for granted. Second, a strong economy also something that wasn’t inevitable.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbAnd third, and most important, a war in Iraq that has been very difficult, but where despite some confusion engendered by an almost meaningless benchmark report last week we now seem to be on course to a successful outcome.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tUne r\u00e9action est int\u00e9ressante plus que les autres, celle de la dynamique et vip\u00e9rine chroniqueuse lib\u00e9rale Arianna Huffington. Elle est n\u00e9cessairement ennemie intime et jur\u00e9e de Kristol. Elle s’attache \u00e0 ridiculiser l’article de Kristol dans une chronique du 17 juillet, d’autant plus gaiement qu’elle estime en avoir eu une sorte de primeur dans le train<\/a> New York-Washington.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abI had a preview of this deluded triumphalist drivel a couple of days earlier on Thursday afternoon specifically. Even more specifically, I was on the 4:00 pm Amtrak Acela from New York to Washington.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbKristol was sitting a row behind me, talking on his cell phone with someone who apparently shared his optimism. Precipitous withdrawal’ really worked, I overheard him say, clearly referring to the president’s use of the term in that morning’s press conference. How many times did he use it? Three? Four? he asked his interlocutor, and the conversation continued with a round of metaphorical back-slapping for the clever phrase they had come up with.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbI, of course, have no idea who was on the other end.<\/em> [White House Press Secretary] Tony Snow, perhaps? After all, he and Kristol were colleagues before Snow left Fox. But whoever it was, the emphasis during their conversation on the significance of the clever phrase has been emblematic of the White House prepping of the president.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n