Brooks on Bush
Behind the NY Times Secret Wall, David Brooks -- the conservative columnist for the Paper of Record -- has a remarkable column about President Bush's ongoing delusions. After interviewing a series of despondent Senators on Capitol Hill who are agonized over the Iraq disaster, Brooks then travels through the looking glass to the White House to meet with a bouyant President Bush:
Far from being beleaguered, Bush was assertive and good-humored. While some in his administration may be looking for exit strategies, he is unshakably committed to stabilizing Iraq. If Gen. David Petraeus comes back and says he needs more troops and more time, Bush will scrounge up the troops. If General Petraeus says he can get by with fewer, Bush will support that, too.
Bush said he will get General Petraeus’s views unfiltered by the Pentagon establishment. He feels no need to compromise to head off opposition from Capitol Hill and is confident that he can rebuild popular support. “I have the tools,” he said.
Ah yes, the tools of a 66% unfavorable rating and looming massive defections from your own party as the next round of Congressional elections draw nearer. Brooks makes clear, however, that the obvious interpretation of Bush's beliefs -- that he's living in a delusional cocoon -- can't be true, because (according to Brooks) "Bush is not blind to the realities in Iraq. After all, he lives through the events we’re not supposed to report on: the trips to Walter Reed, the hours and hours spent weeping with or being rebuffed by the families of the dead."
Huh? What the hell does that have to do with anything? Obviously, it's very sad when a soldier dies in Iraq; I have one friend there who I worry about constantly. But this argument makes no sense -- Bush is not blind to what's happening in Iraq because he's met the parents of dead soldiers who were killed because of his war? Can someone connect the dots for me here? If anything, the fact that Bush is responsible for the death of 3,500 American soldiers suggests that he wants to stay the course to salvage some meaning from their sacrifice. After all, how do you ask someone to be the last man to die for a mistake?
But this isn't even the most remarkable part of Brooks' column. He goes on to analyze the two sources of Bush's delusions, er, "courage":
The first is his unconquerable faith in the rightness of his Big Idea. Bush is convinced that history is moving in the direction of democracy, or as he said Friday: “It’s more of a theological perspective. I do believe there is an Almighty, and I believe a gift of that Almighty to all is freedom. And I will tell you that is a principle that no one can convince me that doesn’t exist.”
This statement illustrates nicely just how unfathomably fucking stupid our President is. He thinks that (a) God supports democracy; (b) history is moving toward greater democracy; therefore (c) Bush is justified invading Iraq to bestow democracy on their people. Evidence and analysis is unnecessary because our President has a "theological perspective." Game, set, match.
But wait. There's more. Here's the second reason Bush is convinced he doesn't need to listen to the American electorate:
He is confident in his ability to read other leaders: Who has courage? Who has a chip on his shoulder? And he is confident that in reading the individual character of leaders, he is reading the tablet that really matters. History is driven by the club of those in power. When far-sighted leaders change laws and institutions, they have the power to transform people.
Remember, this is a President who's stared into the "soul" of Dictator Putin's eyes (and liked what he saw); stands by an Attorney General who's lost the confidence of the entire Department of Justice; nominated someone to head the Department of Homeland Security who had ties to organized crime (and also had completely failed at his post as Interior Minister for Iraq); defended a Defense Secretary who allowed international human rights abuses to flourish under his reign of terror; awarded a Congressional Medal of Honor to a CIA director who failed to stop the most horrific attack on U.S. soil in its 231 year history; and nominated a completely unqualified crony to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court because of her devout loyalty to him. So please forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of President Bush's ability to read leaders.
Sadly, history has indeed been driven by the club of President George W. Bush. And he's succeeded in transforming America into an international pariah, a shell of the virtues and idea for which it once stood.
Far from being beleaguered, Bush was assertive and good-humored. While some in his administration may be looking for exit strategies, he is unshakably committed to stabilizing Iraq. If Gen. David Petraeus comes back and says he needs more troops and more time, Bush will scrounge up the troops. If General Petraeus says he can get by with fewer, Bush will support that, too.
Bush said he will get General Petraeus’s views unfiltered by the Pentagon establishment. He feels no need to compromise to head off opposition from Capitol Hill and is confident that he can rebuild popular support. “I have the tools,” he said.
Ah yes, the tools of a 66% unfavorable rating and looming massive defections from your own party as the next round of Congressional elections draw nearer. Brooks makes clear, however, that the obvious interpretation of Bush's beliefs -- that he's living in a delusional cocoon -- can't be true, because (according to Brooks) "Bush is not blind to the realities in Iraq. After all, he lives through the events we’re not supposed to report on: the trips to Walter Reed, the hours and hours spent weeping with or being rebuffed by the families of the dead."
Huh? What the hell does that have to do with anything? Obviously, it's very sad when a soldier dies in Iraq; I have one friend there who I worry about constantly. But this argument makes no sense -- Bush is not blind to what's happening in Iraq because he's met the parents of dead soldiers who were killed because of his war? Can someone connect the dots for me here? If anything, the fact that Bush is responsible for the death of 3,500 American soldiers suggests that he wants to stay the course to salvage some meaning from their sacrifice. After all, how do you ask someone to be the last man to die for a mistake?
But this isn't even the most remarkable part of Brooks' column. He goes on to analyze the two sources of Bush's delusions, er, "courage":
The first is his unconquerable faith in the rightness of his Big Idea. Bush is convinced that history is moving in the direction of democracy, or as he said Friday: “It’s more of a theological perspective. I do believe there is an Almighty, and I believe a gift of that Almighty to all is freedom. And I will tell you that is a principle that no one can convince me that doesn’t exist.”
This statement illustrates nicely just how unfathomably fucking stupid our President is. He thinks that (a) God supports democracy; (b) history is moving toward greater democracy; therefore (c) Bush is justified invading Iraq to bestow democracy on their people. Evidence and analysis is unnecessary because our President has a "theological perspective." Game, set, match.
But wait. There's more. Here's the second reason Bush is convinced he doesn't need to listen to the American electorate:
He is confident in his ability to read other leaders: Who has courage? Who has a chip on his shoulder? And he is confident that in reading the individual character of leaders, he is reading the tablet that really matters. History is driven by the club of those in power. When far-sighted leaders change laws and institutions, they have the power to transform people.
Remember, this is a President who's stared into the "soul" of Dictator Putin's eyes (and liked what he saw); stands by an Attorney General who's lost the confidence of the entire Department of Justice; nominated someone to head the Department of Homeland Security who had ties to organized crime (and also had completely failed at his post as Interior Minister for Iraq); defended a Defense Secretary who allowed international human rights abuses to flourish under his reign of terror; awarded a Congressional Medal of Honor to a CIA director who failed to stop the most horrific attack on U.S. soil in its 231 year history; and nominated a completely unqualified crony to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court because of her devout loyalty to him. So please forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of President Bush's ability to read leaders.
Sadly, history has indeed been driven by the club of President George W. Bush. And he's succeeded in transforming America into an international pariah, a shell of the virtues and idea for which it once stood.
posted by Ben at 11:02 AM
2 Comments:
Hmmmmm. As a loyal American I am thoroughly disgusted with your blog. We all know its full of lies and anti american rubbish...J/k. I hope you don't stop the blog. It is probably the most informative news interception I get ahold of on a regular basis. Blogs like this one truely do freak the shit out of me but that is our world I guess. And our almighty leader. Fuck. At least our country can still arrest black NFL players who kill dogs. I mean we can't get the white guy in the limelight who sends his fuckin troops on 130 degree pointless deathmarches for over 4 years but at least we can still get those superstars. Bush has a fuckin rap sheet like longer than a horses dick. Not to say Mike Vick is a great guy I guess but damn. Maybe if Vick gets out clean he can start a world leader fighting ring. Bush v. Chaves? Putin v that German chick? Anyhow I'm rambling but I dig your blog and good luck with second round of the NFL prospectus.
Ben: very nice post. I wholeheartedly agree with your disgust and outrage. What should ordinary citizens do? Seriously, I want to do something but what??
Post a Comment
<< Home