As George Bush's time in office winds down, he's found time to sit down and reflect on his tenure with author Robert Draper. The resulting book is called Dead Certain, the title an apparent reference to Bush's defiance and stubbornness in the face of harsh reality.
This attitude is reflected in his answer to a key question from the author, who asked the president what his main goal would be in his remaining time in office. If you were expecting him to say something reassuring, something like "I'm going to focus on finding a sensible way to wrap things up in Iraq so that our soldiers can come home to their families," you'll be disappointed. He declares that his main goal is “To get us in a position where the presidential candidates will be comfortable about sustaining a presence," and (he later added) "stay longer."
So apparently Bush will be spending his days figuring out ways to continue his disastrous war ad infinitum, even after he's safely (for the world) out of Washington, because he's "dead certain" that he's right about Iraq, and nobody is going to get him to change his mind. Furthermore, he assures us that he really believes it when he says that things are going to turn around in Iraq. "You can't fake it," he told the author.
But you needn't worry that the war and all those dead Americans are putting too much stress on the commander-in-chief. When the author noted that he had nobody's "shoulder to cry on," Bush told him, “Of course I do, I’ve got God’s shoulder to cry on, and I cry a lot," and added, "I’ll bet I’ve shed more tears than you can count as president.”
For a president who likes to pride himself on being a strong leader, it seems a bit odd to me that he would admit to being a big crybaby. Somehow, I have a hard time picturing Bush laying in bed at night sobbing into his pillow so he won't wake Laura. It's much easier for me, however, to imagine the mothers and fathers, wives, husbands, and children of all those soldiers who came home in flag-draped coffins crying for the loved ones they'll never see again, and I'm willing to bet that God is a lot more willing to lend his shoulder to them than to Bush.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dave Nalle
Ah, the miracle of demonization. If you can belittle and dehumanize your enemy then they no longer need to be taken seriously and at the same time the hollow foolishness of your own beliefs is less likely to be taken seriously.
Well, at least he admits that he's arrogant
Actually, I believe you make very clear that he doesn't admit he's arrogant, he admits that people accuse him incorrectly of arrogance. But sometimes Bush's thought processes are too subtle for his detractors who mostly just hear what they want to hear.
Let me take you back to the founding days of the holy and always perfect democratic party and share a quote from its revered founder Andrew Jackson, which I suspect Bush always keeps in the front of his mind: "One man with courage makes a majority."
Dave
2 - REMF
"But sometimes Bush's thought processes are too subtle for his detractors who mostly just hear what they want to hear."
- Dave Popu...er, Nalle
Yeah, in fact they're still trying to figure out yet what he meant by, "I know how hard it is to keep food on your family."
--------------------------------
"...share a quote from its revered founder Andrew Jackson, which I suspect Bush always keeps in the front of his mind: "One man with courage makes a majority."
- Dave Popu...er, Nalle
Oh, well that explains everything then. He can't think clearly because he's got that goofy slogan blocking "the front of his mind."
3 - Doug DeLong
Actually, I believe you make very clear that he doesn't admit he's arrogant, he admits that people accuse him incorrectly of arrogance.
Dave, you're pretty skillful at making a quote mean what you want it to mean, instead of what it actually means. I think the quote is pretty clear and speaks for itself.
But sometimes Bush's thought processes are too subtle for his detractors who mostly just hear what they want to hear.
What? Bush has a thought process?
4 - Dave Nalle
Dave, you're pretty skillful at making a quote mean what you want it to mean, instead of what it actually means. I think the quote is pretty clear and speaks for itself.
So do I, Doug. And I doubt anyone but you is likely to read that quote and disagree with me. I may be skillful at turning quotes to my advantage, but in this case no skill was required. The quote speaks for itself.
What? Bush has a thought process?
When you go with the common fallacy of assuming that he is stupid you render yourself incapable of analyzing his actions in any effective way.
Dave
5 - Doug DeLong
And I doubt anyone but you is likely to read that quote and disagree with me. I may be skillful at turning quotes to my advantage, but in this case no skill was required. The quote speaks for itself.
Well, I guess we'll see...Just so we're clear, you think the quote means that he's saying people accuse him incorrectly of being arrogant, and I say it means that he admits to being arrogant. Here's the original quote. Bush is responding to why he so's unpopular...
"I made a decision to lead." He says, "One, it makes you unpopular...and two, it makes people accuse you of unilateral arrogance, and that may be true. But the fundamental question is, is the world better off as a result of your leadership?”
6 - Dr Dreadful
Dave, Dave - the quote is:
"...it makes people accuse you of unilateral arrogance, and that may be true."
In other words, he's admitting that people may be right about his arrogance. OK, he may not be putting his hands up to it unequivocally, but it's not what you're representing him as saying at all.
(with apologies for the Ruvy-style over-emphasis)
7 - Dave Nalle
Y'know, Doug. I think I have to admit to reading into that quote what I expected to see. I somehow missed the entire 'and that may be true' clause even after reading it a couple of times.
It surprises me to see such an admission from Bush, I have to admit. Shows a depth of intelligence and self-examination you have to admire, really.
Dave
8 - Clavos
Doc's got it rightest of all.
9 - REMF
"It surprises me to see such an admission from Bush, I have to admit."
- Dave Popu...er, Nalle
Almost as surprising as your admission of reading into a quote something it was not.
10 - Doug DeLong
I think I have to admit to reading into that quote what I expected to see.
Wow, Dave admits he's wrong and Bush admits he's arrogant.
A new day has dawned...
11 - REMF
Doug...Psych!!
12 - Clavos
So where's the once widely revered (and practiced) grace of the victorious gentleman??
Dead, I suppose, as are most of the old values in this poor imitation of a once-great culture in which we now live.
Pity.
13 - REMF
#12;
Spare me.
14 - Clavos
Q.E.D.
15 - REMF
K.M.A.
16 - Dr Dreadful
Hey. By virtue of my Britishness, I'm the only &%#@ing gentleman on here, you @#$%er&%$*ers!!!
;-)
17 - Clavos
Don't get carried away with it, Doc, but there's a grain of truth to what you say.
By and large, Americans are a crude, loutish lot.
18 - Dave Nalle
Almost as surprising as your admission of reading into a quote something it was not.
Not the first time and probably not the last. When you actually read the posts and comment on a variety of topics rather than posting different takes on the same comment over and over, you're bound to make the occasional mistake.
Dave
19 - Christopher Rose
I can't decide what's the most disturbing, the President of the United States claiming to cry on god's shoulder or Dave Nalle admitting he made a mistake. I guess the Pres just edges it, but what a close call!
Doesn't having a President who believes all this mystical shit make you worry?
20 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
"Doesn't having a President who believes all this mystical shit make you worry?"
Having George Walker Bush for a president ought to have made any American worry. The guy is stupider than a cockroach laying on its back.
But the "mystical shit", Chris?
Have a shufty at this quotation from a famous American document.
I have no respect for a cockroach on its back wiggling its little arms trying to right itself, like the sitting American president, but James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and John Hancock? - an entirely different class of creature...
Last I looked, Chris, it was the United States, the land of those mystical G-d chasers, who saved the Brits' asses twice in the last 100 years...
21 - Christopher Rose
I realise that it is a bit challenging for you to make sense when talking about religion and politics, so I guess that can excuse the rambling pointlessness of your last comment, Ruvy.
I share your concern about the general lack of intelligence this president is displaying but why on earth do you drag in the US DoI or a somewhat distorted perception of what was at stake in the two world wars?
For better or for worse, we are all living in the present not the past; we need to deal with the issues of the day, although of course it is important not to forget where we came from and how much we have grown since then.
There is still a lot to do before we humans can feel pleased with our achievements but we're still a young species and hopefully there is still time to get it right.
Bush chunders on about being judged by history, a line he seems to have borrowed from that other mystical shit Tony Blair, which seems little more than a blatant attempt at avoiding dealing with the responsibility and burden of the consequences for his actions to me.
Although it's true that to bail out of Iraq now would be a shameful abandonment of duty (not that Bush is a stranger to that, of course), the decision to invade Afghanistan and Iraq in the first place seems to have done precious little to make the world a better or safer place.
As you maintain that it is not these countries but others like Saudi Arabia and others that are the true enemies of America, I presume you would agree with me on that at least.
22 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
"Bush chunders on about being judged by history, a line he seems to have borrowed from that other mystical shit Tony Blair, which seems little more than a blatant attempt at avoiding dealing with the responsibility and burden of the consequences for his actions to me.
Although it's true that to bail out of Iraq now would be a shameful abandonment of duty (not that Bush is a stranger to that, of course), the decision to invade Afghanistan and Iraq in the first place seems to have done precious little to make the world a better or safer place.
As you maintain that it is not these countries but others like Saudi Arabia and others that are the true enemies of America, I presume you would agree with me on that at least."
For once, Chris, I can register agreement with you. And I can easily respect your view - you were a soldier yourself once, if I remember correctly, and presumably have a comprehension of what it means to stand and to serve. And in what you write above, you clearly have a sense of honor - sadly missing in the sitting president of the United States, not to mention others....
23 - Nancy
#17 - You're right, IMO.
#19 - yes.
24 - bliffle
Bush isn't the first to demand that history justify his aberrant behaviour. The oldtime commies did it, and I've even heard child molesters claim that in time their perversions would be accepted as normal.
25 - handyguy
I'm not quite sure why a straightforward, well-written piece like this gets under Dave's skin so. If it did not carry the byline "Doug DeLong," would it get the same reaction? In other words, is this personal?
Yes, Doug uses the words to reinforce his negative opinions of George Bush. The NY Times front-page article on "Dead Certain" over the weekend had a similar effect without taking an explicitly opinionated stance. Doug's is an opinion piece, but far less hysterical than many of the words that fly by on Blogcritics. The Bush quotes speak for themselves [as do his failed policies].
It's true that calling Bush stupid lets him off the hook too much. His manufactured aw-shucks persona seemed politically shrewd when things were working. Now that the administration is mired in disaster, it's hard to know what to think of his cowboy act.