Another Wonder Kid

Britain’s elections are over and David Cameron became the youngest Prime Minister in Britain in almost 200 years. Gordon Brown gave a very restrained farewell address, looking as grim as ever if not more.

"Only those who have held the office of prime minister can understand the full weight of its responsibilities and its great capacity for good." Brown said he had "loved the job, not for its prestige, its titles and its ceremony, which I do not love at all." - hmm, really?

"No, I loved the job for its potential to make this country I love fairer, more tolerant, more green, more democratic, more prosperous, more just — truly a greater Britain."

A young and exuberant David Cameron and his even younger wife Samantha are now Britian’s first couple. A lot of emphasis has been placed on David Cameron being young. Somehow it reminds me of another young politician, who was full of energy and promise, who talked eloquently and inspiringly, who was married to an equally highly educated professional woman who always made more money than he did, and who gave the country a sense that it’s on the verge of a new beginning. In summary – a wonder kid.

Sure enough, not only would he be elected, he would be re-elected as well a few years later. And he would see a prosperity in his country that made him feel giddy and intoxicated with success. He was sharp and competent, but he was perhaps more in love with himself than his country.

Yes, I am talking about Bill Clinton. And yes, I am talking about Tony Blair. And yes, I used to be a fan of both of them. And yes, I now feel that they have done their own parties a huge disfavor, because they focused too much on themselves as opposed to what they are supposed to stand for. They both left the door wide open for the opposition to come in and undo everything.

In the case of Bill Clinton, he was disgraced by the Monica Lewinsky scandal, but he was not destroyed by it. In fact, towards the end of his presidency, he remaned fairly popular. True, Al Gore was and still is rather dull, and that made it more challenging for him in electoral politics. But more importantly, Al Gore felt that he had to distance himself from Bill Clinton, which made it almost impossible for hm to take the credit for the prosperous Clinton years. Besides, Al Gore was always in the shadows of Bill Clinton, and somehow all the credit went to Clinton. After the controversial 2000 elections put George W. Bush in the White House, the country went through 8 years of bad, worse and even worse. Now that there has been some distance between now and the Clinton years, I am beginning to see how Bill Clinton had done the “progressive” agenda (I would rather not use the word “liberal” because it emphasizes the wrong things) serious damage by pushing for his own success at the expense of his successor, and thereby at the expense of what is good for the country in the long haul beyond his presidency.

And likewise Tony Blair. He was hugely popular at the beginning, although many people claim that Gordon Brown should have got the credit for the strong economy in the first half of the Blair years. But Gordon Brown is the British version of Al Gore – no one can get excited over this gloomy looking Gordon Brown. I still do not quite understand if Tony Blair truly believed in the just cause for an Iraqi invasion, but he sounded sure of himself. He dragged Britain into the war started by George W. Bush, and therefore his standing went along that of George W. Bush. Poor Gordon Brown fared better than Al Gore in that he at least got a taste of what it’s like to sit in the office of 10 Downing Street, but he certainly did not get in at the right time. The wonder kid before him had all the fun, took all the good times with him, and left a mess behind for him to clean up. And no one, not even a wonder kid in his party could do that.

So another wonder kid of the opposition has shown up – David Cameron. Why does history always repeat itself?