A comparison of routines

Few Princeton students are able to escape the unfortunate habit of postponing sleep until the early hours of the morning, and, as a quick glance over at my detested alarm clock confirms, I am not one of them. Our extracurricular commitments and desires inevitably prevent us late-nighters from working until the rest of Princeton Township is sound asleep.

Save our frequent complaints about lacking sleep, this practice in truth has no negative consequences — the fact is that we feel a natural obligation to complete our coursework and usually do so even when it means forgoing rest. Apart from the occasional group project, our decision to work diligently ultimately has no effect on others; no one but our family and friends has reason to care about our work habits.

But imagine for a moment that your every decision impacts thousands, if not millions, of lives and that your every word might be criticized. I, for one, would be extremely self-conscious about every decision and would probably get even less sleep than I do now.

Sadly, however, our nation's leader has a different outlook. His typical workday consists of photo-ops with foreign dignitaries and meetings with staff that are inconsequential not because they don't have far-reaching effects, but because few new decisions have been made recently. Most days, he stops working by 6 p.m. and is in bed by 9 p.m. Though there are reports that he still has an undergraduate affinity for fart jokes and working out, years of hard work in Austin and Washington have apparently impressed maturity upon his daily routine.

Two years ago, at the annual White House Correspondents' Dinner, first lady Laura Bush delivered a brief comedy routine poking fun at her husband. While joking about his bedtime, she recalled telling him that "if you really want to end tyranny in the world, you're going to have to stay up later." New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd echoed this sentiment last year without any pretense of humor: "Can't [Bush and company] ever order pizzas and pull some all-nighters?"

But the idea of an all-nighter, something near and dear to the hearts of us late-night students, is foreign to Bush. He wouldn't want to lose sleep — he apparently sleeps "a lot better than people would assume" — for the purpose of revising his policies. It seems perverse that he gets a full eight hours of sleep each night while servicemen die because of his decisions.

Bush evidently sees no need to stay up late — he has already made his big decisions and won't alter them now, even as his generals, advisers and support base call for change. He announced last year that he is "never going to forget the vow [he] made to the American people." He was not referring to his presidential oath to uphold the Constitution, but rather to his self-appointed task of cleansing the world of terrorism.

This statement was another indication of Bush's firm decision to leave withdrawing from Iraq to the next president.In December, he responded to the bipartisan Iraq Study Group's recommendation for withdrawal with a "surge." The congressional bill urging withdrawal by March 2008 that last week passed through both houses never had a chance and was vetoed yesterday. Upon vetoing the bill, Bush argued that its passage would force military commanders to "take fighting directions from politicians 6,000 miles away," as if the surge hadn't been conjured up by Republican think tanks and bureaucrats. It is irrational that our nation's leader is unwilling to allow any recent evidence to change his policy, but it is sadly unsurprising.

Our president's stubbornness and his deadlock with Congress mean that our country is essentially stuck to its current course until 44th president's Inauguration Day. Recognizing this, the media has started billing the coming presidential race earlier than usual, but it is too early for all but the most interested to pay attention. American politics is unfortunately stuck in the doldrums.

In December, I decried the fact that we students are often only interested in things that immediately concern us, but for now, it might be good for our sanity that we don't concern ourselves with current political matters. In truth, Bush's policies are as likely to change as late-nighter's sleeping habits, and there is no reason for us to pay close attention to his irrationality. Michael Medeiros is a freshman from Bethesda, Md. He may be reached at mmedeiro@princeton.edu.