I read Bush’s speech, and, suffice it to say, there was not much new there (for me, at least). Everything he said is stuff I already know or believe, to some extent. but I guess I was not the target audience. Good thing, too, since I didn’t watch it. At any rate, he seems to have found one fan:
am not, to say the least, a fan of President Bush. But a portion of his speech tonight genuinely moved me and made me think more highly of him. It was the part where he addressed opponents of the Iraq war, said he understand their passion but asked that they think of the stakes of defeat now that the war had happened and asked that they not give in to despair. I cannot remember this president ever speaking to his political opponents except to mischaracterize their views and use them as a straw man. (His post-Florida speech did to some extent, but it was so vague and struck me as so patently disingenuous that it didn’t produce any similar reaction in me.)
This may be easy for me to say because I supported the war and oppose withdrawal. But even Bush’s prior pro-war speeches mostly struck me as simplistic, ugly and demagogic, reminders that I supported the war despite the administration rather than because of it. But this moment in his speech tonight really struck me as some kind of symbolic or emotional break from the past for Bush–a genuine attempt to unify Americans rather than polarize them. Bush and his supporters (both inside and outside the administration) have made it so damn hard to support them on this war. It just got a little easier tonight.
Lines
Glenn has totally convinced me that he’s just DougJ with this little tidbit:
I’m not sure how many different ways this is just wrong, but it borders on pathological lying. Glenn is a hack, a complete and total whore to the Bush administration. Pathetic and misleading. This should be the last thing Instadick is ever allowed to write. He should be banned from the internet just for lack of insight, lack of intelligence and lack of self-esteem.
SomeCallMeTim
The difference between TNR and the Weekly Standard narrows by the week. Chait’s comment would have the same weight if it were made by Stephen Hayes. It’s not at all representative of the anti-Iraq war Democrats, or, increasingly, any Democrats. And based on his prior track record, if it’s possible to make a mistake in taste, he did so here.
DougJ
Gleen Reynolds is a pathological liar. It is to John’s immense credit that he rarely links to him.
Nikki
He shouldn’t have bothered trying to qualify this last paragraph. There is no way war opponents are suddenly going to embrace Bush and this war after 5 years of being characterized as traitors, defeatists, anti-Americans and blame America firsters. Bush has spent 5 years dividing all of us. A speech ain’t gonna cut it.
Barry
Aside from everything else, when you’re dealing with somebody who’s exhibited the dishonesty and arrogance of Bush, one speech isn’t enough. Heck, many people here expected that Rumsfield would ‘spend more time with his family’ come January 2005, but that didn’t happen, and that would have been an easy thing for Bush to have done. Bush has made it quite clear that he’s a sociopath; I’ll judge him accordingly.
Justin
Where are all the libertarian-leaning Republicans when you need them? Bush admitted over the weekend to authorizing a domestic surveillance program outside the law and we’re just going to let him change the subject?
Paddy O'Shea
You know John, Shaky’s speech last night didn’t do all that much for me, either. But in the spirit of optimism and hope that this morning washes over our great and shining land from sea to shining sea, I penned (or rather typed) the following to the Los Angeles Times:
“I guess we should look at the bright side here. Not only are we winning this war, we apparently will be winning it for quite some time. No longer should we look upon this conflict as at least 5 more years of war, but rather as at least 5 more years of victory.”
Padraig “Patrick” O’Shea
Sierra Madre, California
DougJ
The whole libertarian thing is just a pose. They want to distinguish themselves from the knuckle-draggers of the Christian right. But when Karl Rove catches them in the shower, they bend over and give it up nice and easy, just the same.
That’s mean, I know. But it’s true.
Lines
Where are all the elected Libertarians? Is there some stockpile of them I don’t know about?
Paddy O'Shea
DougJ: Are you suggesting that Libertarians are little more than “Drop the Soap” Republicans?
That sounds like a slippery slope to me.
ppGaz
Hear, hear.
Ancient Purple
Great.
Now the King is on TV pontificating about how the media discussing the secret wire taps are “shameful” and “helped the enemy.”
Needing a ratings boost there, Sparky?
DougJ
Yes. I wouldn’t want to tar John with that, though — he does stand up for what he thinks is right a lot of the time. But Glenn Reynolds is Karl Rove’s bitch.
p.lukasiak
I tried reading the speech, but after the first six paragraphs of lies, spin, misrepresentation, and intellectual dishonesty, I couldn’t get any further.
Steve S
Agreed. In order for Bush to win my trust back, he’s got to step away from his party. Frankly, if Ariel Sharon can do it, I think even Bush can. Withdrawing the Alito nomination and offering up a moderate would be a good start.
Then he needs to include Democrats and Independents in his war planning. Bring back in retired generals like Clark, Shinseki, Odom, etc.
Until then. You reap what you sow, and Bush will go down in history as the worst President since James Buchanan.
Steve S
Maybe he can have them all arrested and sent to the Gulag.
I wonder if the people in the Bush administration walk around all day calling each other Comrade?
Comrade Rice, how are you this morning?
I am well, Comrade Rumsfeld. How was your weekend at the Dacha?
ppGaz
The Bushspuds have miscalculated. With a cowed and scared press, a la 2002, you can bare your teeth and grrrrr at the press and it will back away like a scared toy poodle.
That was then, and this is now. The press is no longer afraid of these guys. Today, if you snarl at them, they are likely to sink their teeth deeply into your shin bone and hang on until you are on the ground, and they can get at your jugular. The little poodle of 2002 has turned into the guard dog of 2005.
If I were the B-Monkeys, I’d think twice before trying to blame the press for my troubles in 2005.
Richard Bottoms
What Nikki said.
Shakes the Clown, aka “The President” has no political capital, good will, or benefit of the doubt left.
Fuck him and the bumblers who made this mess.
If by some miracle it works out, then maybe the worst thing that happens is they don’t end up in a Nurmberg type trial for the torture and abuses surrounding their prosecution of the war.
Lines
ppGaz:
Unfortunately your poodle has teeth that are so rounded over they can’t even chew up the rotting flesh of undead-Cheney. They can snarl and bite, but they lack the teeth to do the damage you think they can do. No one takes the press seriously anymore, and after making the press to be the “enemy” of democracy the Bush Admin still knows it can do whatever the hell it wants
DougJ
I am now officially too upset to troll. I had the same feeling after Katrina.
ppGaz
No doubt that the press has been weakened in the last five years. But don’t count them out. I think they have a better chance than a friendly, stable Iraq democracy has right now. If you get my drift, which I am sure that you do.
BTW, all, WashingtonMonthly has a very good thread going this morning on the subject of WHY Bush would go to such lengths to avoid the slam-dunk FISA approval process, which can even be used retroactively when necessary, thereby obviating his “there’s no time” defense.
Why, indeed? Because they don’t want a paper trail? Because they know that their general approach to the use of power is abusive, and they just figure that the less recordkeeping, the better?
Why, oh why, this grotesque writhing in front of the cameras? Why this posturing?
Krista
And if you’re too upset to troll, then you must REALLY be upset. Trolling usually soothes you.
DougJ
The only thing that could cheer me right now would be another thread about baby-eating.
Krista
I’m sure there’s one out there somewhere, hon.
John Redworth
This speech was a bit odd even if some along the partisan lines have already reacted for or against… I say it was odd since I have heard or read some comments from normally partisan folks who had slightly reversed thoughts…
As I said, I thought the speech was decent but not over the top or emotionally stirring since he really didn’t touch any new ground… he seemed Presidential in the way his father was during the speech (a touch of homespun with a bit of authority)but at the same time I was more concerned with missing Family Guy…
His press conference today (which as I write this hasn’t been mentioned) was way different… you can tell he doesn’t like speaking to crowds that may think differently than he does… the first part of the PC was about the eavesdropping issue and the rest of it seemed as if his speech writers accidently gave him some brainstorming bullet points hitting a number of topics that didn’t seem to quite fit…
One reporter asked Bush if he had made a mistake during his time in office (much along the same lines that was asked back during the debates) and Bush acknowledged that he hasn’t answered that question because he felt that he was being cornered to say that Iraq was a mistake… then he went on a five minute tangent about Iraq, elections, our troops and the faulty intelligence without ever admiting there was a mistake…
It reminded me of the stories and biographical information that I have read about Bush and his style in which he avoids ever admiting a mistake no matter how small… maybe I should send him the info I got concerning job interviews in which you can admit (if asked) a mistake or weakness that is actually a positive such as “I find myself trying to make everything I do perfect” or “I sometimes get so involved in my work that I have been called a workaholic.”
Lines
What does it take for Conservatives to stand up and really cast down the attempts of the Bush Administration to circumvent the Constitution? Does Bush have to go on live TV and eat a kitten? Do we actually have to watch Jean Schmidt bathing in virgin blood to take serious her slandering of veterans? How many talking heads does Cheney have to tentacle whip on live television before we accept that these neo-Republicans don’t want Justice, they don’t like the Constitution and they like the taste of fresh baby?
Lines
Mr Owl, how many times do you have to repeat the same speech before you finally get it right?
ppGaz
Take heart. An early net-poll this morning is returning 80% “No” to the question “Do you think we are winning the war in Iraq.”
Bush’s main problem right now is that he has squandered his credibility. People just aren’t going to listen to him now and take his assertions at face value.
If he said “cold weather tomorrow” there’d be a run on air conditioners.
ppGaz
Your US Attorney General appears this morning in front of the cameras, in front of the White House. The little weasely man …uh, the AG …. appears to be speaking for the president, just like any paid mouthpiece.
Have we seen this, since Mitchell and Nixon? Is the AG just a spokesman for the president’s positions?
This lying little sonofabitch is the guy looking out for our civil liberties?
Steve S
To be honest. In speech 4 of Operation Enduring Bullshit, he started off well. I actually thought… Hmm, maybe he’s going to change course and do things right.
Then half way through the speech he started calling fellow Americans who disagreed with him defeatists, traitors, cowards and other names, and I quickly lost any favorable impression.
Frankly, I have my doubts that this speech was much different. And every news report I’ve heard on this speech has reconfirmed that once again he launched into his name calling of his opponents.
Being called names by the President may play well to the base, but it sure doesn’t endear him with the rest of America.
Paddy O'Shea
I just put a pro-military bumper sticker on my pickup:
“Our Troops Deserve A Smarter President.”
I think we can all agree that the civilian leadership of our military is sadly lacking right now.
Angry Engineer
There’s a difference between “libertarian” and “atheist neoconservative champion of the free market”. There’s precious damn few of the former and an overabundence of the latter floating around right now.
WRT “the speech”, I would have been a lot more impressed had this sort of thing been a regular occurrance since the start of the war. Unfortunately, I think the only reason we’re seeing anything resembling honesty and responsibility is in reaction to sagging poll numbers.
Andrei
Ok… enlighten us instead of making us read the general left reactionaries in your comments. What exactly did you believe in the President’s speech? And more importantly… why and to what extent?
ats
TNR has become just another adjunct of the Daniel Pipes crowd, complete with Arabic translations by MEMRI. It is a valid point of view, but it is masquerading as geopolitically liberal. THAT is disingenuous.