------------------------- * * X.com * Facebook * E-Mail * * * X.com * Facebook * E-Mail * Messenger * WhatsApp * Dieser Beitrag stammt aus dem SPIEGEL-Archiv. Warum ist das wichtig? The end

of an era has many faces. One is that of a narrow-lipped president appearing on primetime TV, asking Americans for money and their confidence. Another is that of Utah native Nathan Barnes,

23, who didn't survive his deployment to Iraq and whose photo appeared in the obituaries section of his local paper. The end of an era can also look like a woman who was recently

sitting at my table during a luncheon with the United States secretary of agriculture. She told me that she was his personal assistant. But what does that mean these days? she added. Things

White House for another 14 months, but judging by the mood among his friends, you would think it was the last 14 hours. Based on the official list of campaign donors published last Friday,

it seems that Big Business has also turned its back on the Republicans. Sixty corporate CEOs who had previously donated primarily to the Bush campaigns -- including John Mack of Morgan

Stanley, Rupert Murdoch of NewsCorporation and Terry Semel of Yahoo -- are now giving more money to the Democrats. Indeed, it's already time for goodbyes at the White House. In recent

weeks, some of the president's closest advisors have been so quick to have their names stricken from the government's personnel files that one might think some deadly disease had

broken out in the Oval Office. It started four months ago when the speechwriter who invented the phrase "axis of evil" gave his notice. He was followed by the White House press

secretary ("It's time for me to make money again"), the budget director, the director of strategic initiatives, and chief political advisor Karl Rove, a man Bush, in better

days, referred to as the "boy genius." Two cabinet secretaries have also bid the president farewell -- followed last Wednesday by the secretary of agriculture. VISIBLY DISSIPATING

It is all too apparent that the political energy is seeping out of the West Wing of the White House, which forms the heart of the US adminstration with the Oval Office and the Cabinet Room.

Gone are the days when a buoyant president, when asked to name his favorite philosopher, cheerfully declared it was "Jesus," or when first lady Laura Bush would poke lighthearted

fun at the neoconservative dream duo. "George's answer to any problem at the ranch is to cut it down with a chainsaw," she said at the annual White House Correspondents'

Dinner in 2002, "which I think is why he and Cheney and Rumsfeld get along so well." Thousands of war dead later, no one is in the mood for laughter these days. At a press

conference last Friday, Bush was asked for the first time whether he still sees himself as an asset, or possibly as a liability, to his party. The question reflects the mood in his innermost

circle. In an internal meeting, White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten apparently asked all employees who were tired of their jobs to resign, adding that anyone who did not resign by

September would have to stick it out to the end. Many within the Republican Party are also in a hurry to break with Bush, anxious to head into the coming election campaign politically

cleansed and personally purified. The conservative presidential candidates' treatment of the sitting president is about as ruthless as Soviet reformer Nikita Khrushchev's handling

of his predecessor Josef Stalin: They make no mention of Bush in their speeches and TV ads. The president is now experiencing first hand the flip side of what happens in a winner-takes-all

society. Of course, when the winner takes all, there isn't much left over for the loser. Being seen as a friend of Bush in today's America is a blemish, one that can only be

softened by ardently distancing oneself from the president. This explains why the heroes of the conservative revolution are now appearing before the public as repentant sinners. WILD

APPLAUSE FOR GREENSPAN Bookstores already have an impressive assortment of conservative confessions on their shelves, books with titles like: "The Tragic Legacy," "Dead

Certain -- The Presidency of George W. Bush," "The Lost War" and "The Terror Presidency." Alan Greenspan, who was chairman of the US Federal Reserve for 16 years and

who the Bush administration asked to stay in office a few months past the end of his term, also apparently wanted to get in his two cents' worth. The man has an instinct for future

developments -- apparently even for those that do not involve the US dollar. At a speech last week at George Washington University, Greenspan made a conscious effort to distance himself from

Bush. "I am not a man of the right wing," he said, adding that this was already reflected in the fact that he thought Bush's tax reforms were a bad idea. It was enough to

generate wild applause from his audience. In truth, however, Greenspan approved of the tax reforms, but he also insisted on cutbacks elsewhere, including government spending for social

programs. A leading conservative like Newt Gingrich, once crowned _Time_'s "Man of the Year," cannot help but be pleased that Americans have welcomed the break with Bush with

open arms. Gingrich, who has repeatedly and semi-publicly toyed with the idea of throwing his hat into the presidential race, recommends that his party base its new strategy on turning its

back on Bush. CONSERVATIVES TURN TO FRANCE AS A MODEL This strategy worked like a charm in France, Gingrich recently told foreign journalists. French President Jacques Chirac "was in

relatively deep trouble, not quite as much trouble as George W. Bush is." Under normal circumstances the opposition should have won the French election. But it didn't.

Chirac's Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy was the interior minister by day and, as his admirer from Washington says, portrayed himself as the "candidate of change" by night.

Sarkozy positively oozes chutzpah -- and that impresses a man like Gingrich. "If one of the Republican candidates figures this out, they will frankly win the election next year,"

he said. But it was obvious that even Gingrich wasn't quite convinced, mainly because he isn't confident that any of the current Republican candidates could pull it off. The new

era has many faces. Perhaps Gingrich hopes that one of them could look like his.