George W. Bush the Righteous
Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus
-
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:35 am
- Location: anywhere but here
George W. Bush the Righteous
NY Times Article Link (registeration required)
What a great read. I know it's long, but it's worth it. Well-written short biography of Bush. It explains why he's so darn sure of every decision he made and why he believed he's never made mistake.
Before I read this article, I think he's an arrogant and selfish chichenhawk. I despiced him. Now I am begining to be afraid of him and simply hope that Americans vote him out of the White House. Nothing is more scarier than having a guy leading this country who thinks he's right because the God told him so.
Edit to make my stand clearer.
What a great read. I know it's long, but it's worth it. Well-written short biography of Bush. It explains why he's so darn sure of every decision he made and why he believed he's never made mistake.
Before I read this article, I think he's an arrogant and selfish chichenhawk. I despiced him. Now I am begining to be afraid of him and simply hope that Americans vote him out of the White House. Nothing is more scarier than having a guy leading this country who thinks he's right because the God told him so.
Edit to make my stand clearer.
- Chrisoc13
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:43 pm
- Location: Maine
Well, I just read it. While it is interesting, I must take it with a grain of salt knowing the source. I like the NY times, but their opinions are often far out there, and this close to the election, im not surprised to see something like this.
Nobody should just blindly agree with what the article says because of the general opinion of the source, and because of how close it is to the election and the motives which may be behind it.
Still an interesting read.
Nobody should just blindly agree with what the article says because of the general opinion of the source, and because of how close it is to the election and the motives which may be behind it.
Still an interesting read.
- Fireball
- Posts: 4762
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm
Actually, the author of this piece is a former Wall Street Journal writer, and is a conservative.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
-
- Posts: 7140
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm
And then:In the Oval Office in December 2002, the president met with a few ranking senators and members of the House, both Republicans and Democrats. In those days, there were high hopes that the United States-sponsored ''road map'' for the Israelis and Palestinians would be a pathway to peace, and the discussion that wintry day was, in part, about countries providing peacekeeping forces in the region. The problem, everyone agreed, was that a number of European countries, like France and Germany, had armies that were not trusted by either the Israelis or Palestinians. One congressman -- the Hungarian-born Tom Lantos, a Democrat from California and the only Holocaust survivor in Congress -- mentioned that the Scandinavian countries were viewed more positively. Lantos went on to describe for the president how the Swedish Army might be an ideal candidate to anchor a small peacekeeping force on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Sweden has a well-trained force of about 25,000. The president looked at him appraisingly, several people in the room recall.
''I don't know why you're talking about Sweden,'' Bush said. ''They're the neutral one. They don't have an army.''
Lantos paused, a little shocked, and offered a gentlemanly reply: ''Mr. President, you may have thought that I said Switzerland. They're the ones that are historically neutral, without an army.'' Then Lantos mentioned, in a gracious aside, that the Swiss do have a tough national guard to protect the country in the event of invasion.
Bush held to his view. ''No, no, it's Sweden that has no army.''
The room went silent, until someone changed the subject.
A few weeks later, members of Congress and their spouses gathered with administration officials and other dignitaries for the White House Christmas party. The president saw Lantos and grabbed him by the shoulder. ''You were right,'' he said, with bonhomie. ''Sweden does have an army.''
This story was told to me by one of the senators in the Oval Office that December day, Joe Biden
Well if Joe Biden said it happened...Lantos, a liberal Democrat, would not comment about it.
- Fireball
- Posts: 4762
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm
But even when a paper is "liberal" or "conservative," what you're talking about is their op/ed page, not the news coverage. The New York Times is the best, most reliable record of current events. You'd be hard pressed to find political bias in their news reporting.
Is the NYT editorial board liberal? Yes.
But you know, what? I live in Dallas, TX. Home of the The Dallas Morning News, which is a very, very conservative paper. But their news reporting is still reliable.
If you can find evidence of opinion positions tainting regular coverage, such as is common at the New York Post, the Washington Times, the LA Times back in the 1990s (new management now) and at Fox News and CBS News under Rather, that's one thing. But to distrust the non-opinion pieces of a paper due to the content of its op/ed page betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of journalism.
Is the NYT editorial board liberal? Yes.
But you know, what? I live in Dallas, TX. Home of the The Dallas Morning News, which is a very, very conservative paper. But their news reporting is still reliable.
If you can find evidence of opinion positions tainting regular coverage, such as is common at the New York Post, the Washington Times, the LA Times back in the 1990s (new management now) and at Fox News and CBS News under Rather, that's one thing. But to distrust the non-opinion pieces of a paper due to the content of its op/ed page betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of journalism.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
-
- Posts: 7140
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm
"Journalist" cites his own book for these quotes but does not attribute where they came from. O'neill I assume but not attributed.As I reported in "The Price of Loyalty," at the Bush administration's first National Security Council meeting, Bush asked if anyone had ever met Ariel Sharon. Some were uncertain if it was a joke. It wasn't: Bush launched into a riff about briefly meeting Sharon two years before, how he wouldn't ''go by past reputations when it comes to Sharon. . . . I'm going to take him at face value,'' and how the United States should pull out of the Arab-Israeli conflict because ''I don't see much we can do over there at this point.'' Colin Powell, for one, seemed startled. This would reverse 30 years of policy -- since the Nixon administration -- of American engagement. Such a move would unleash Sharon, Powell countered, and tear the delicate fabric of the Mideast in ways that might be irreparable. Bush brushed aside Powell's concerns impatiently. ''Sometimes a show of force by one side can really clarify things.''
-
- Posts: 7140
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm
Cite?By midyear 2001, a stand-and-deliver rhythm was established. Meetings, large and small, started to take on a scripted quality. Even then, the circle around Bush was tightening. Top officials, from cabinet members on down, were often told when they would speak in Bush's presence, for how long and on what topic. The president would listen without betraying any reaction. Sometimes there would be cross-discussions -- Powell and Rumsfeld, for instance, briefly parrying on an issue -- but the president would rarely prod anyone with direct, informed questions.
-
- Posts: 7140
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm
-
- Posts: 7140
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm
- Fireball
- Posts: 4762
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm
Bush was very shaky the night of the attack in his short statement to the nation.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
- Fireball
- Posts: 4762
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm
Interesting that Poleaxe the Apologist for the Bushites can only nitpick elements of the article and has no argument against the core assertions.
I was a Bushite once, too. I know how it works.
I was a Bushite once, too. I know how it works.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
-
- Posts: 7140
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm
Notice this last sentence. The "journalist" is telling you what the quote meant. Didn't we just read the quote? Why is he telling us what the quote meant. Oh, because he wants to make sure you come away from that paragraph with a certain perception.And for those who don't get it? That was explained to me in late 2002 by Mark McKinnon, a longtime senior media adviser to Bush, who now runs his own consulting firm and helps the president. He started by challenging me. ''You think he's an idiot, don't you?'' I said, no, I didn't. ''No, you do, all of you do, up and down the West Coast, the East Coast, a few blocks in southern Manhattan called Wall Street. Let me clue you in. We don't care. You see, you're outnumbered 2 to 1 by folks in the big, wide middle of America, busy working people who don't read The New York Times or Washington Post or The L.A. Times. And you know what they like? They like the way he walks and the way he points, the way he exudes confidence. They have faith in him. And when you attack him for his malaprops, his jumbled syntax, it's good for us. Because you know what those folks don't like? They don't like you!'' In this instance, the final ''you,'' of course, meant the entire reality-based community.
- Fireball
- Posts: 4762
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm
Ummm... you realize this is an essay, don't you, not an article?
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
-
- Posts: 7140
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm
Notice that last part that seems to be part of the quote, but doesn't actually have the quote marks. Hmmm... now who said that, Gildenhorn or the "journalist?"Talk of the faith-based initiative, Gildenhorn said, makes him ''a little uneasy.'' Many conservative evangelicals ''feel they have a direct line from God,'' he said, and feel Bush is divinely chosen.
-
- Posts: 7140
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm
- Fireball
- Posts: 4762
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm
I wasn't defending this article in particular, I was defending the New York Times, which is wrongly maligned as being untrustworthy.
Of course, this essay didn't appear in the New York Times itself, in any case.
My defense of this essay's accuracy would be that this writer was a former Bush supporter and is a political conservative who has interviewed a great number of persons close to the president, including former Cabinet officers.
Also, the presentation in this essay of the president's decision making process matches the externally verifiable data.
Of course, this essay didn't appear in the New York Times itself, in any case.
My defense of this essay's accuracy would be that this writer was a former Bush supporter and is a political conservative who has interviewed a great number of persons close to the president, including former Cabinet officers.
Also, the presentation in this essay of the president's decision making process matches the externally verifiable data.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
-
- Posts: 7140
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm
- Fireball
- Posts: 4762
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm
So you're saying that there's no external evidence to indicate that Bush doesn't listen to dissenters, that he doesn't like to hear other points of view and that he is extremely stubborn once he's made up his mind?
You mean that this essay doesn't conform to the presentation of Bush in both of Bob Woodward's books? Or is Woodward not a reliable source anymore, either?
It's okay to question Bush. Really. It won't harm you. I was where you are now. You can be cured.
You mean that this essay doesn't conform to the presentation of Bush in both of Bob Woodward's books? Or is Woodward not a reliable source anymore, either?
It's okay to question Bush. Really. It won't harm you. I was where you are now. You can be cured.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
- khomotso
- Posts: 2180
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 3:06 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
I think you can feel that the writer pushes his argument a bit too far, and still be aware that there's a great deal of substance to the point he's making. This is not new material, it's not the first time we've heard this criticism, and it's certainly not a concern for which you need to be a Kerry supporter in order to share. It's simply a more elaborate way of laying it out than I've seen before.
I found those remarks from McKinnon especially striking, although also not particularly new. A very trenchant summary.
I found those remarks from McKinnon especially striking, although also not particularly new. A very trenchant summary.
He started by challenging me. ''You think he's an idiot, don't you?'' I said, no, I didn't. ''No, you do, all of you do, up and down the West Coast, the East Coast, a few blocks in southern Manhattan called Wall Street. Let me clue you in. We don't care. You see, you're outnumbered 2 to 1 by folks in the big, wide middle of America, busy working people who don't read The New York Times or Washington Post or The L.A. Times. And you know what they like? They like the way he walks and the way he points, the way he exudes confidence. They have faith in him. And when you attack him for his malaprops, his jumbled syntax, it's good for us. Because you know what those folks don't like? They don't like you!''
- Fireball
- Posts: 4762
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm
McKinnon's population data is pretty bad. The middle of America hardly has 67% of the population.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)