Bush and Blair in the Rose Garden. Poignant, almost tragic. I don't have a transcript yet, but I was listening to part of this on C-Span radio as I was driving in my car.
Bush said that he's read three biographies of George Washington in the last year and isn't it interesting that they are still analyzing what the first President did? If they're still trying to understand that now, it means that the final interpretation of what he has done will be written long after he is gone. So, he says, he feels confident in what he is doing, despite all the criticism. It's based on sound philosophical ideas, he said, and eventually people will see that he was right.
At some distance there were protesters, and Tony Blair said he couldn't quite hear what they were saying but he imagined it wasn't complimentary. Blair brought a light, humorous touch that contrasted with Bush's profession of deep commitment to philosophy and history. Blair expressed more concern for the people who think he was wrong about Iraq, though he still says the war was right, and of course he articulates the reasons why it was right so much better than Bush can. Everywhere in the world, Blair says, when people have been given the choice of what kind of government they want, they choose freedom and democracy, not a secular dictatorship or religious fundamentalism. I'm not so sure that's true, but it's always so beautiful when someone says it is.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
३३ टिप्पण्या:
Bush said of Brown: "I hope to help him in office the way Tony Blair helped me." I bet that Brown is thinking: "As long as you don't 'help' me the way you helped Tony Blair."
Blair's comment is true, but only by virtue of being tautological: "...when people have been given the choice of what kind of government they want, they choose..."
"he articulates the reasons why it was right so much better than Bush can."
If only Bush had Blair's oratorical gifts, and a willingness to use them to explain and justify his policy goals, how differently our domestic political drama might have played out.
hmmm... let's see.
the end of a failed partnership stubbornly clinging to a failed strategy despite world outcry; and let's ignore bush pleading the fifth on AG's bedside visit to Ashcroft, what do you see in your magnanimous intelligence?
"Bush's profession of deep commitment to philosophy and history," and the fact that he read three GW biographies. Oh and Blair's "beautiful" statement about choice of government.
And then you wonder why people call you names? You can't be that clueless.
tjl said of Blair:
"he articulates the reasons why it was right so much better than Bush can. If only Bush had Blair's oratorical gifts, and a willingness to use them to explain and justify his policy goals, how differently our domestic political drama might have played out."
Well, sure...as long as you actually believe Bush's rationale for invading Iraq.
DO YOU??
Everywhere in the world, Blair says, when people have been given the choice of what kind of government they want, they choose freedom and democracy, not a secular dictatorship or religious fundamentalism.
A typical Blair delusion. He wants it to be true and the merely obstructive fact that it is not has absolutely no impact on his mind or what he asserts.
This is the man who has said without blushing "I only know what I believe."
A good working definition of a psychopathic personality.
I think Bush paints slightly too rosy a picture here.
So, he says, he feels confident in what he is doing, despite all the criticism. It's based on sound philosophical ideas, he said, and eventually people will see that he was right.
He's right on the big picture, sure. The strategic decisions were sound, but the implementation of them was greatly lacking.
I'm sure the correctness of many of his ideas and actions will be proven later, much as was done with Reagan and Truman, but it's not *all* going to be shown to be correct. Anyway, he presided over a government that ballooned in size and fiscal irresponsibility.
Not that dems are indicating they'll be any better: they're just as pro pork and pro bloated government - and they have the added advantage of being anti-tax cuts, which are proven to work as wonderful revenue boosters.
Watch Commander Codpiece squirm!
Now, wouldn't a REAL MAN face the querstion head on and give a straight answer, as opposed to running and hiding?
Bush wanted a drug-addled Ashcroft to sign a document agreeing to a program that violates the Constitution. All the while Ashcroft lacked the authrity to sign as he'd given his authority over to Comey.
20 months until America is free of this cretin.
"as long as you actually believe Bush's rationale for invading Iraq."
Blair clearly believed it, since he too invaded Iraq. Blair had his own intelligence service at his disposal. He had no need to take Bush's word for it.
tjl,
I asked if YOU believed it.
DO YOU??
DEWAVE,
When you say Dems are "pork and pro bloated government" are you discounting the fact that the Republicans have controlled congress for 12 years (including spending programs) and that we now have a massive debt (versus the surplus Clinton left), a massive trade deficit and plenty of "pork" to go around for EVERYBODY??
Just wondered...
tjl,
Evidently not.
"tjl,
I asked if YOU believed it"
As a devotee of Realpolitik as practiced by Bismarck and Kissinger, I would have left Saddam in place to act as a check on Iran, and done my best to foment conflict between them.
I thought lefties had long ago renounced balance-of-power diplomacy.
"As a devotee of Realpolitik as practiced by Bismarck and Kissinger, I would have left Saddam in place to act as a check on Iran, and done my best to foment conflict between them."
althouse, your readers are dorks... such an accomplished blog.
Like, dude! I totally know what the Prez-man means!
Dude, I'm in this rock band, man, and like no one gets how great we are! We can't get a record deal for nothin'!
People won't realize our true artistic and musical genius until we are long dead. Then they will see that we are as brilliant as Mozart and Shakespere combined!
Honest!
tjl,
Bismarck and Kissinger?
Duh.
20 months until America is free of this cretin.
Hey, if you all had gotten your act together, we could have been free of him quite a while ago.
Dewave: "Anyway, he presided over a government that ballooned in size and fiscal irresponsibility."
Luckyoldson: "are you discounting the fact that the Republicans have controlled congress for 12 years (including spending programs) and that we now have a massive debt (versus the surplus Clinton left), a massive trade deficit and plenty of "pork" to go around for EVERYBODY?"
Learn to read, dumbass. It will work much better for you than hastily scanning posts for criticism of democrats and reflexively rushing to support them.
That's a great post! Even before I finished reading it -- while thinking about leaving a comment -- you filled-in some of my thoughts:
"Blair expressed more concern for the people who think he was wrong about Iraq, though he still says the war was right, and of course he articulates the reasons why it was right so much better than Bush can."
I've written many times on my blog, especially in reference to Bush's infatuation with the Truman presidency (Truman was down at 22 percent in the polls at one point), that President Bush will likely be vindicated by history. Sure, things could have gone better for him, and he's made some big mistakes. But all presidents screw up. Lincoln was downhearted at Civil War casualties, and feared for his reelection in 1864. G.W. Bush will rise in the historians' rankings, I have no doubt.
Burkean Reflections
AlphaLiberal said...
Watch Commander Codpiece squirm!
Now, wouldn't a REAL MAN face the querstion head on and give a straight answer, as opposed to running and hiding?
Bush wanted a drug-addled Ashcroft to sign a document agreeing to a program that violates the Constitution. All the while Ashcroft lacked the authrity to sign as he'd given his authority over to Comey.
20 months until America is free of this cretin.
Your BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) is showing again.
tjl said...
"he articulates the reasons why it was right so much better than Bush can."
If only Bush had Blair's oratorical gifts, and a willingness to use them to explain and justify his policy goals, how differently our domestic political drama might have played out.
The bottom line is, is that Bush is uncomfortable speaking in front of people and in front of a camera and through that discomfort it brings about the level of inarticulateness that the usual suspects in the media and in leftist circles pounce on. But that's just a reflection on the sheer shallowness of their own characters and how they view people in general. Shallowness and malignant narcissism is their particular playground.
dewave,
Did you, or did you not say this?
"Not that dems are indicating they'll be any better: they're just as pro pork and pro bloated government - and they have the added advantage of being anti-tax cuts, which are proven to work as wonderful revenue boosters."
methadras,
Instead of blathering on about how mean the media is or how it's the left that makes fun of the poor inarticulate fellow...maybe you should consider the reasoning behind what you consider "shallow" behavior by those who think he's the worst President in our nation's history.
You know...the little things like: Continuing to support Gonzales, or lying our country's way into an invasion of Iraq or illegally wiretapping Americans or fumbling the Katrina situation or thumbing his nose at our long term allies or standing behind Wolfie at the World Bank.
I could care less how well the man speaks. It's his pure lack of intelligence that scares the hell out of me.
donald douglas says: "G.W. Bush will rise in the historians' rankings, I have no doubt."
Well, sure...but maybe that's because it couldn't get much worse.
I'll put my chips on Bush being considered the very worse President in our nation's history...period.
dewave,
I'm telling your friend, b, that you called me a dumbass.
That's hateful...and I can't tell you how much it hurts.
Really.
I'll put my chips on Bush being considered the very worse President in our nation's history...period.
By people who can't name more than two Presidents between Jefferson and FDR, maybe. As this indicates, Bush is currently ranked about average among the Presidents.
You should take a look at the 19th century. Of the 12 Presidents we had between 1841 and 1881, NINE are ranked by scholars as among the ten worst Presidents in American history. People who think Bush is one of the worst Presidents we've had just don't realize how bad our leadership was between the era of the Founding Fathers and our ascendancy as a superpower.
"This is the man who has said without blushing "I only know what I believe."
A good working definition of a psychopathic personality."
Or, your run-of-the-mill "Progressive."
Anyone that really believes the President of the United States has any real impact on the economy, is woefully unaware of the power of the underlying american economy, the role of the Fed (and the fed chief), and the emergence of monetary policy as our preferred mechanism to stimulate economic growth.
A while back, Cyrus and I, who probably represent both sides of the political spectrum, posted some data on economic growth and tax revenues--the bottom line is that it is nearly asymptotic although there are minor fluctuations in the business cycle that create periodic downturns. Those downturns are usually self correcting but can be pushed a bit by fiscal policy.
I'll put my chips on Bush being considered the very worse President in our nation's history...period.
Yeah. They said the same thing about Clinton. And Reagan. And Carter. etc etc. It goes with the territory. Every generation considers their bad politicians to be the absolute worst ever, mainly because people neither study nor understand history.
Lucky: lying our country's way into an invasion of Iraq
Support that assertion with proof.
or illegally wiretapping Americans
Unsettled law, not illegal. "On October 4, 2006, a panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled[62] that the government can continue the program while it appeals the lower court decision."
or fumbling the Katrina situation
Katrina was the fault of the Mayor and Governor, both Democrats. Everything that went wrong was predicted by their After Action report on Hurricane Andrew. They ignored their own disaster plan.
Talk to me again about those aluminum tubes and how you think Bush invaded over fears they would be used for missiles and not processing enriched uranium... That was hysterical.
Lucky: It's his pure lack of intelligence that scares the hell out of me.
The funny thing is that Bush, for all his failings, is still more intelligent than you.
Fen,Why would I give a flying fuck what YOU think about anything...especially concerning Bush?
Sycophants aren't exactly the best source of objective opinion.
Fen said...
Lucky: lying our country's way into an invasion of Iraq
*I suggest you pick up a newspaper, periodical or book. Listening to Sean Hannity ain't gonna cut it.
or illegally wiretapping Americans
Unsettled law, not illegal. "On October 4, 2006, a panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled[62] that the government can continue the program while ony l it appeals the lower court decision."
*Did you happen to hear Comey's testimony last week? Or read what was said about why Ashcroft and Comey WOULDN'T SIGN?? (I know, if it wasn't on Fox News, you KNOW NOTHING)
or fumbling the Katrina situation
Katrina was the fault of the Mayor and Governor, both Democrats. Everything that went wrong was predicted by their After Action report on Hurricane Andrew. They ignored their own disaster plan.
* I've never said anythiding defending Nabors or the Gov. But, if you actually think Bush and Brownie did a good job...well, we ALL know why you would think that...don't we?? (It's called a SUCKFEST)
Talk to me again about those aluminum tubes and how you think Bush invaded over fears they would be used for missiles and not processing enriched uranium... That was hysterical.
*Good God...you're still arguing the semantics of a posting a week ago? GET A FUCKING LIFE, DUDE.
Fen,
Until you can pick yourself up a dictionary:
From Webster's:
Main Entry: missile
Function: noun
: an object (as a weapon) thrown or projected usually so as to strike something at a distance stones, artillery shells, bullets, and ROCKETS ARE MISSILES.
Duh...again.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा