Althouse: What George W. Bush said after sitting through Trump's inaugural address.

March 30, 2017

What George W. Bush said after sitting through Trump's inaugural address.

"That was some weird shit."

Possibly apocryphal, but New York Magazine claims to have 3 witnesses.

What do you think of "That was some weird shit" as an assessment of the Trump inaugural address? Multiple answers permitted. Check them all if you want!

It WAS some weird shit.

Sounds like the way Bush talks in private.

That was very disrespectful to the new President.

Very disrespectful to the American people who chose this man as our President.

That's the kind of healthy disrespect I like to see in America.

Well, Bush is an expert in weird shit. He's done a lot of it.

Bush knows weird shit, he's seen a lot of it.

I doubt if Bush said it, I don't trust 3 anonymous witnesses, and I don't trust NY Magazine.

I don't care if it's true or not. It's funny. And I like Trump.

I hate Trump, so dish up whatever shit you've got. I've got a big appetite for that sort of thing.

It only seems weird to elitists like Bush who don't get the real America. Trump spoke to us.

Sorry, Althouse. You STILL have not come up with one thing for me to click.

pollcode.com free polls

65 comments:

Hagar said...: I think it goes to what I was mumbling about yesterday. Trump is disrespectful of the "establishment" (the house that FDR built), and George W. does not "get" that.; 3/30/17, 8:47 AM
Hagar said...: Nor does his little brother according to this mornings news.; 3/30/17, 8:48 AM
Original Mike said...: I went with 1 and 2.; 3/30/17, 8:53 AM
Henry said...: Possibly apocryphal, but New York Magazine claims to have 3 witnesses.

Not the Russians again!; 3/30/17, 8:53 AM
Sebastian said...: It was weird and W was disrespectful and W realizes perfectly well that Trump trumped the Bushes and he was ticked off and the civility BS only applies to GOPers addressing Dems, not "populists."; 3/30/17, 8:56 AM
Nonapod said...: I totally believe he could've said that.

But I think all presidential inaugurations are weird. It seems like a strange thing to make such a big spectacle of. Are we coronating a monarch? Didn't we fight some war to get away from that sort of nonsense?; 3/30/17, 8:57 AM
JHapp said...: Like Hagar said but I think he was just starting to get it, and it feels weird at first.; 3/30/17, 9:01 AM
robother said...: Sometimes, you have to cauterize the Nation's wounds before binding them up.; 3/30/17, 9:02 AM
Birkel said...: So called Bush is just the sort of Big Government Republican so called Chuck prefers.; 3/30/17, 9:09 AM
dreams said...: Liberal media using a former Republican president to give legitimacy to their attacks on a current president, it's just their well established modus operandi.; 3/30/17, 9:09 AM
AlbertAnonymous said...: Maybe he wasn't speaking so much about trump as he was commenting on how weird it was watching the haters in disbelief that trump was actually president. I imagine the looks and side comments from the obamas and clintons were priceless...

Weird shit indeed; 3/30/17, 9:10 AM
TreeJoe said...: It was a weird inaugural speech. Don't read the transcript, or bring out sound bites from it, listen to the entire thing and realize it was a scripted speech - and it was very weird.; 3/30/17, 9:12 AM
Che Dolf said...: Possibly apocryphal...

Apocryphal means of doubtful authenticity. "Possibly apocryphal" = possibly possibly inauthentic.; 3/30/17, 9:12 AM
Bob Boyd said...: "That was some weird shit."

I heard that a lot in Iraq.; 3/30/17, 9:15 AM
Unknown said...: Need a box for "this is what NY Magazine thinks Bush would say". That doesn't sound to me like Bush talks, but it is what I think NY Magazine caricatures W as talking like.; 3/30/17, 9:16 AM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: Maybe he was talking about his own struggle with the rain poncho. That was some weird shit.; 3/30/17, 9:17 AM
Paul Kirchner said...: In a speech he gave at Southern Methodist University in January 2011, W expressed concerns that America was becoming isolationist, nativist, and protectionist. By electing Trump, the American people expressed concerns that America, under W's presidency, had become all about fighting pointless foreign wars, open borders, and job-destroying free trade. So naturally, he's confused and unhappy.; 3/30/17, 9:21 AM
Bob Boyd said...: Maybe some recreational drug was just wearing off...I mean, Bush is an artist now so...; 3/30/17, 9:28 AM
Brando said...: Who knows. I could see Bush using some language, but can't imagine him saying it within earshot of anyone who would repeat it. And we'll never get confirmation either way, so we're left imagining whether Bush ever said that.; 3/30/17, 9:44 AM
AllenS said...: I want to know the names of the 3 witnesses, or it didn't happen.; 3/30/17, 9:47 AM
rehajm said...: I need more context. You can pretty much make up your own reality without any...; 3/30/17, 10:05 AM
Darrell said...: Bush was sitting with the Obamas, Clintons, and Carters. Of course it was weird shit there.; 3/30/17, 10:06 AM
Roughcoat said...: My New Year's resolution was to swear off reading all stories relying on anonymous sources. I'm sticking to it.; 3/30/17, 10:06 AM
Bay Area Guy said...: 3 anonymous sources! Oh, goody!

Hillary Clinton - "Bush said it was wierd shit"

John Posesta - "Yep, I heard that too!"

Chelsea Clnton - "he used a cuss word, I overheard it, I think it was "shit".

Brilliant journalism.; 3/30/17, 10:13 AM
rcocean said...: All the Bushes and Clintons should just go away.

Forever.

Thank You.; 3/30/17, 10:16 AM
rcocean said...: W expressed concerns that America was becoming isolationist, nativist, and protectionist.

Immigration in this country is at a 100 year high. We're letting, in and have let in, over the 20 years more immigrants than any other country in the history of the world.

But Bush is concerned about "nativism". He just needs to shut up.; 3/30/17, 10:18 AM
Darrell said...: I'm sure Bush is worried about the fate of the NWO, just like McCain. When you're out-of-touch, everything looks like weird shit.; 3/30/17, 10:24 AM
TWW said...: I don't have the time or the interest n reading through all of the choices.

And I'm retired.; 3/30/17, 10:27 AM
Birkel said...: @ Roughcoat

Other than the weather report, you get no MSM 'news' at all?

:-); 3/30/17, 10:32 AM
Unknown said...: "That was some weird shit.", George W Bush

Earth calling Trumpies - THAT WAS SOME WEIRD SHIT.

Trump is going down down down.

Trump is back to attacking the New York Times, the Freedom Caucus, Democrats and so on.

Trump doesn't get it that when you belittle, mock, humiliate people in public, don't be surprised if people won't touch you with a barge pole.

"ONLY I CAN FIX IT" ... tee hee.

Russia, Russia, Russia.; 3/30/17, 10:44 AM
Chuck said...: One of Althouse's best polls in a long time.

Easy one for me; it WAS some weird shit. If I had been standing next to President Bush as he said it, I would have had such a sense of relief, knowing that someone in his position felt about it exactly as I did. I have three witnesses (all intensely pro-Trump, and two of them major Republican Party officeholders in Oakland County, Michigan) who will attest that I said, while watching the Trump inaugural address live, that it was the worst-written inaugural address in my lifetime, and also the "weirdest."

And as usual, the poll is not interesting for my input; it is interesting as a window into the soul of the Althouse commentariat. Which, to be sure, is stratified in its own right, but now increasingly over-represented by the Trumpian alt-right. Note the number of responses for, "I doubt if Bush said it, I don't trust 3 anonymous witnesses, and I don't trust NY Magazine."

I'm not sure if I would have even included such an option if I had crafted the poll. But Althouse did, and kudos to her for offering what turned out to be a leading option. How she screwed her head into thinking of it I can't say. But that result is what makes this post so much fun for me.

Alternative facts.; 3/30/17, 10:55 AM
Hagar said...: Think of Trump as a New York Speedy Gonzales.

There is a whole world out there that is not invited to the White House Correspondents' Dinner.; 3/30/17, 11:02 AM
Darrell said...: Unknown is having a stroke. Send help.; 3/30/17, 11:11 AM
Inga said...: It absolutely WAS some weird shit, especially Trump's speech. Poor Melania and Baron looked like they just wanted to go home. It would've been even weirder if Trump had his way and tanks and missles rolled down the Avenue after Trumps's limo.; 3/30/17, 11:22 AM
Chuck said...: Perhaps the reason that I find the basic assertions of this story so easily believable, and why I am so mystified by people who presume that the story is a hoax, is because "That was some weird shit," sounds exactly like George W. Bush. Short, direct, not terribly judgmental (he didn't say what I had said, which was that it was an abysmal speech from a speechwriting perspective), and with a kind of soft and detached personal amazement as you'd expect with someone who reads a lot and who has recently turned to painting in retirement.

It just sounds so much like Bush, I cannot imagine a major publication citing three witnesses to support a story that was made up, on a single discrete fact about which there'd be no misinterpretation.

It's an interesting case study in how deeply some Trumpkins wouldn't want to accept something that is anti-Trump. It doesn't even fit with the Trumpian "we hate the GOP establishment and the BushCheneyMcCainGraham neocons..." The right response from them, it would seem, would be that of course Bush said it, and the Bushes are assholes. To be sure, that WAS the response of many. But I don't know how to square that, with any presumption that the whole story is a hoax. Was it a hoax, to falsely smear George W. Bush? Maybe we should get President Bush a Twitter account, so that he can go after the biased and failing New York Magazine.

Oh well. TrumpWorld and all. I'd give it a try, to attempt to think like a Trumpian. But it just gives me a headache.; 3/30/17, 11:32 AM
traditionalguy said...: I think W just called us Deplorable's for agreeing with every word Trump spoke. The Bush World Order never saw that happen before.; 3/30/17, 11:37 AM
Bob Boyd said...: "it just gives me a headache"

It does appear to be a little swollen.; 3/30/17, 11:44 AM
Darrell said...: The Trump Inauguration was great. You can still find it at YouTube, if you must see to believe.; 3/30/17, 12:03 PM
Quaestor said...: Chuck wrote: Oh well. TrumpWorld and all. I'd give it a try, to attempt to think like a Trumpian. But it just gives me a headache.

Worry not, it's only vacuum pressure.; 3/30/17, 12:06 PM
Chuck said...: Darrell;
In the YouTube video of the Trump inaugural address, can you see how clearly it was that Trump lied when he said, "The rain should have scared them away. But God looked down and he said, 'We’re not going to let it rain on your speech.' In fact, when I first started I said, "Oh no." First line, I got hit by a couple of drops. And I said, 'Oh, this is, this is too bad, but we’ll go right through it.' But the truth is that it stopped immediately. It was amazing. And then it became really sunny, and then I walked off and it poured right after I left."

?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-us-president-false-claims-inauguration-white-house-sean-spicer-kellyanen-conway-press-a7541171.html; 3/30/17, 12:24 PM
Etienne said...: Bush, the man who did a Pearl Harbor on Iraq?

Yea, I don't talk about the man who bankrupted America, and blew up the world.; 3/30/17, 12:35 PM
Richard Dolan said...: Fake news. NY Mag is written by and for the Manhattan, get-along go-along crowd, the ones a bit too dim for the NYer. For eight years its political coverage was very deep in the tank for O, and it was just as deep in the tank for Hillary! (and pretty much any other Dem). And they have believable sources close to W?

And it does not sound at all like W. He went 8 years without saying anything publicly that was derogatory about O -- his norm on the rare occasions he said anything about O and Mrs O was to be complimentary -- and it's very hard to believe he would zing Trump that way on his first day (first minute!) in office even if he thought T's inaugural was weird. He made it a point of honor not to inject himself into the Washington wars during O-time, and he did so by mostly keeping to himself his views of the current president. He also knows who he can trust completely. And we're supposed to believe that there were three folks close enough to W to be around when he made such uncharacteristic comments, and those three didn't respect W enough to keep his confidence?

Don't believe it.; 3/30/17, 12:35 PM
Hagar said...: But it just gives me a headache.
Good!; 3/30/17, 12:47 PM
Chuck said...: Richard Dolan said...
Fake news. NY Mag is written by and for the Manhattan, get-along go-along crowd, the ones a bit too dim for the NYer. For eight years its political coverage was very deep in the tank for O, and it was just as deep in the tank for Hillary! (and pretty much any other Dem). And they have believable sources close to W?

And it does not sound at all like W. He went 8 years without saying anything publicly that was derogatory about O -- his norm on the rare occasions he said anything about O and Mrs O was to be complimentary -- and it's very hard to believe he would zing Trump that way on his first day (first minute!) in office even if he thought T's inaugural was weird. He made it a point of honor not to inject himself into the Washington wars during O-time, and he did so by mostly keeping to himself his views of the current president. He also knows who he can trust completely. And we're supposed to believe that there were three folks close enough to W to be around when he made such uncharacteristic comments, and those three didn't respect W enough to keep his confidence?

Don't believe it.

It would be a point of pride, on the part of New York magazine, to keep the confidences of whoever the three people were, who supported the story. Journalism principles and all.

But it would be a point of pride on my part, with no loyalty to the magazine, or the author, or Trump, to find one or more of the sources and get them to confirm it in the face of doubters like you. And rub your noses in it.

btw: You talk about how Bush had gone 8 years without saying anything publicly that was derogatory about "O." Okay. This was not a public statement about "T."

What I presume, is that the three persons who overheard the comment, or to whom the comment was addressed, are persons who were among the highest-level VIP's at the inauguration, and who despise Trump enough to have breached whatever level of privacy that President Bush anticipated. Bush might have said it to Bill and Hillary Clinton. Who might then have talked to friends who were close to the New York magazine staff. That seems like a real possibility. Bush might also have said it to Republican VIPs, who were willing to confirm it because of how they feel about Mr. T.

This is yet another one of those things that the Trumpkins' digging in for a fight makes me want to give them a fight.; 3/30/17, 12:49 PM
Mr. Majestyk said...: I voted for Trump, but I didn't think the speech was right for that occasion. Tone matters in an Inaugural speech, and, as I remember it more than 2 months later, Trump didn't come across as a gracious winner. Still, unlike some, I don't obsess about Trump's shortcomings. I am just happy with the good things he is doing and, as for the things I don't like, I just remind myself that he kept Hillary out of the White House.; 3/30/17, 12:53 PM
Chuck said...: Further;

I expect that some people might doubt that President Bush might have been in enough of a jocular mood, to have said something like that about the Trump speech, to three people. Or, say, two people like Hillary and Bill Clinton, with somebody like Lynne Cheney standing so close it would have been impossible not to overhear...

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/journalstar.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/b4/8b46ceb1-ea60-50ff-a1f9-3a44a7ba798f/5882397738482.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C743

And:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2017-01-20/AP/Trump_Inauguration_69075.jpg-a4d01.jpg

And:

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--ffN26J_9--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/jnc3oxx2llwhzmypxpos.jpg

And:

http://cdn01.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/clinton-inag/donald-trump-shouts-out-hillary-clinton-19.jpg; 3/30/17, 1:01 PM
DCATTY said...: Let's not forget that he might not have been talking only about Trump (assuming this is true). Remember the Schumer speech? That was out of nowhere -- like the country could not possibly survive an entire inauguration ceremony without some mention the rights of the transgendered.; 3/30/17, 1:27 PM
Trumpit said...: "Bush, the man who did a Pearl Harbor on Iraq?" I've never heard it put that way before. I will just add that he had the solid encouragement and backing of the neocons, and the right-wing media propaganda machine. The unknown million or so dead can't speak about this.

We all agree that Trump's inaugural speech was the antithesis of awe-inspiring to say the least. It was "some weird shit." Bush, who was a stooge, patsy and pliable president, understood an awful speech when he heard one. He gave many himself.
I'll never forget his pandering & pathetic "defense of hetero marriage" speech.; 3/30/17, 1:32 PM
AllenS said...: Having not watched Trump's Inaugural speech, I'll just take a guess and say: Winning!; 3/30/17, 1:58 PM
Michael said...: Bush could have been referring to the way Hillary glared at Bill who was ogling Trump's wife. Or he could have been laughing at himself over the Bush-is-a-clown-idiot who can't put on a rain poncho. The press and lifelong republicans, of course, know what Bush meant.; 3/30/17, 1:59 PM
Chuck said...: Michael said...
Bush could have been referring to the way Hillary glared at Bill who was ogling Trump's wife. Or he could have been laughing at himself over the Bush-is-a-clown-idiot who can't put on a rain poncho. The press and lifelong republicans, of course, know what Bush meant.

Like the Trumpettes knowing that it is untrue, and "fake news"... ?; 3/30/17, 2:20 PM
Bad Lieutenant said...: Nonapod said...
I totally believe he could've said that.

But I think all presidential inaugurations are weird. It seems like a strange thing to make such a big spectacle of. Are we coronating a monarch? Didn't we fight some war to get away from that sort of nonsense?

3/30/17, 8:57 AM

Excuse me, Non:

Not coronate, crown.
Not coronating, crowning.
Not coronated, crowned.

That is all.; 3/30/17, 3:03 PM
Michael K said...: ""That was some weird shit," sounds exactly like George W. Bush."

I agree. Bush in private is very much different from his public dull tongue tied manner.

I never met Bush but my father-in-law knew Hubert Humphrey well and said he was a very funny warm hearted guy in private. Like Bush, Humphrey was a complete stiff in public.

I am a big fan of what Trump does but not of his public pronouncements.; 3/30/17, 5:40 PM
BN said...: Ah, i don't know. Down in Texas, saying "that's some weird shit" to describe an event is like sayin' "fine and dandy" when someone asks how ya feelin'.

Keep Austin weird'n shit.; 3/30/17, 9:05 PM
BN said...: Nobody ever seen "Dazed and Confused"?; 3/30/17, 9:08 PM
Rockport Conservative said...: Statements out of contexts are interesting. Was the subject what all went on, the riots the protests; was it the losers and their actions, was it Trump himself, his speech? Hard to say here in Texas, many could have said the same and meant any of the above. He could have meant the whole shebang, as we say here in Texas, the crazy race to the nomination, the many almost he's done scenarios. A lot to say "that's some weird shit" about.; 3/30/17, 10:58 PM
Amadeus 48 said...: Bush was obviously referring to Schumer reading the Sullivan Ballou letter at the inaugeration. Now THAT was weird. At least he didn't read Col. Travis's last letter from the Alamo.; 3/31/17, 4:47 AM
Michael McNeil said...: Bush, the man who did a Pearl Harbor on Iraq?

Oh, yeah. Bush's attack on Iraq occurred out of a clear blue sky with no warning whatsoever — just like Pearl Harbor — NOT.; 3/31/17, 7:33 AM
Etienne said...: Actually Pearl Harbor was in response to our trade embargo on Japan. It was expected that they would attack. Embargo's are acts of war.; 3/31/17, 12:57 PM
Michael McNeil said...: “Acts of war” such as embargoes were responded to in those days by a quaint little thing known as a “declaration of war” — which was supposed to occur before the deliberate onset of hostilities. Japan's failure to do this (they tried instead to accomplish both basically simultaneously, and in the end launched a surprise attack without a prior declaration of war), earned Japan a huge amount of bad press and American public opprobrium — what FDR termed “A day that will live in infamy” — together with enthusiasm for the war that drove many thousands of American civilians to enlist in the war effort, who thereafter fought it most vigorously. Japan didn't have to do it that way, despite their justification perhaps in going to war with the U.S.; 3/31/17, 5:20 PM
Michael McNeil said...: Contrariwise, not only was George W. Bush's attack on Iraq anticipated by public buildup of American armies along the border with Iraq, with that intention (attacking iraq) baldly enunciated all along, but beyond that, the U.S. Congress did pass a declaration of war (i.e., “authorization for the use of military force” which is constitutionally the same thing, months ahead of time.; 3/31/17, 5:34 PM
Michael McNeil said...: This is Piers Morgan's response to Donald Trump's inaugural address on January 20, 2017 — composed in the form of a letter back to Trump. Please read the whole thing! (Quoting in its entirety to make it easier…):

Bloody hell!

That was one of the most astonishing speeches I have ever heard.

In fact, I’m not even sure it was a speech at all.

It was a rip-roaring, saber-rattling, blisteringly tough, unashamedly populist tirade that will have shocked, stunned, enthralled or appalled the world in equal measure.

As I write this, social media is exploding.

The self-assigned ‘smart crowd’ who loathe and detest you erupted in a predictable storm of sneering, horrified outrage.

Celebrities, political rivals and media types frenziedly competed to win the prize for most insufferably pompous, righteously indignant Trump-hater. Most of them insisting it was the ‘worst Inauguration speech ever made.’

Simultaneously, I saw myriad tweets from ‘ordinary’ people who absolutely loved it.

So as with your divisive, polarizing campaign, America is split down the middle.

And let’s be honest, you said little to heal that division nor heal the still open wounds of your opponents.

Instead, you took a massive fist and clunked it down on the rain-splattered heads of the Washington establishment – as they sat just yards away.

You only spoke for ten minutes, but that was long enough to pound them into stupefied, eye-bulging silence.

‘We are transferring power from Washington DC and giving it back to you, the American People,’ you roared. ‘The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories; their triumphs have not been your triumphs; and whole they celebrated in our nation’s capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families across the land. That all changes – starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you.’

Wow. Power to the People!

You were stridently nationalist.

‘America first, AMERICA FIRST!’ you bellowed. ‘Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs, will be made to benefit American workers and American families.’

I could imagine the rust-belt workers in places like Michigan who got you elected punching the air when they heard those words. This is exactly why they voted for you, a man they view as a billionaire Robin Hood who they trust to save them from the elite, out-of-touch sheriffs of Washington.

You spoke of mothers and children trapped in inner-city poverty, rusted-out factories scattered liked tombstones, an education system ‘flush with cash’ failing children, and streets engulfed by crime, gangs and drugs robbing Americans of their potential.

You painted a dark, dismal picture of a broken society but one that many Americans away from New York and California will recognize.

You stared out, eyes blazing and barked: ‘This American carnage stops right here and stops right now!’

(Continued below...); 3/31/17, 6:49 PM
Michael McNeil said...: (Continued from above…)

Then came the promises.

‘We will bring back our jobs… our borders…our wealth… our dreams.’

You pledged to build new roads, highways, bridges, airports, tunnels and railways.

You said you’d get Americans off welfare and back to work, and follow two simple rules: ‘Buy American and hire American.’

You vowed to ‘eradicate completely’ Islamic terrorism from the face of the Earth, and then invoked God to support your belief that, ‘when you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice.’

Finally, you cried: ‘We will make America strong again… wealthy again… proud again… safe again. And yes, we will make America great again.’

It was an extraordinary tour de force and in its way, as non-political as you are yourself.

Certainly it wasn’t overtly Conservative. Indeed, Bernie Sanders probably found himself nodding to large parts of it. He, too, understood far better than Hillary that there are now two Americas: the East and West coasts and everything in between.

It also answered the question as to whether President Trump would be any different to the man who campaigned. Here was your stark, uncompromising, thunderous answer: ‘NO!’

Instead, you unleashed a full throttle populist manifesto that spelled out the Trump Doctrine more clearly than perhaps that of any other president in history.

And you did it in the astonishingly direct, simple messaging style that has made you the most controversial yet successful man in world politics.

There was no attempt to mollify your opponents.

You didn’t even mention Hillary Clinton’s name. Many, including me, thought that was a mistake. She, after all, had the guts and good grace to turn up to her own political funeral.

Nor did you reach out to those many millions of Americans who voted against you and appeal to them to give you a chance, as many urged you to do.

But in a way, I’m glad you didn’t.

Why pretend to be something you’re not?

After all, a major part of your appeal is your authenticity.

Barack Obama is Mr Nice Guy and was a very disappointing president.

Oh, he looked and sounded the part. But as a leader he was woefully ineffectual, and significantly reduced America’s power and standing on the world stage to the benefit of Russia, China and the barbaric Islamic State.

‘Yes we can!’ Obama got us all to chant in 2008 and 2012. Only it turned out most of the time to be ‘No, we can’t!’

That’s why 70% of Americans before the election said they thought the country was heading in the wrong direction. And that’s why they’ve now gone for someone who is the very opposite to everything Obama stands for and represents.

You’ve declared it’s time for an entirely different approach: Mr Tough Guy.

And you’ve made it crystal clear America will now take care of itself and its own interests first.

It’s a statement of protectionist intent that will send a rocket around the world and have everyone wondering the same thing: can you deliver on all or any of this?

Eight years ago, I interviewed you for GQ magazine.

You told me then your life philosophy: ‘You’ve gotta win. That’s what it’s all about. Muhammad Ali used to talk and talk, but he won. If you talk and talk, but you lose, the act doesn’t play.’

I thought of those words as you took the oath of office today.

Nobody has talked the talk quite like you have to get to that podium.

You won the election because tens of millions of your fellow countrymen bought into your raucously confident, unequivocal mantra that you will Make America Great Again.

Today, you reiterated that mantra in spectacular fashion. It was unquestionably the best speech you have ever made. One that every single person who voted for you wanted you to make.

But words aren’t enough any more.

Now, you’ve gotta walk the walk or the act doesn’t play.

It’s time, as you said, for action.

America’s never had a leader like you, and there are many willing you to fail.

(Continued below…); 3/31/17, 6:51 PM
Michael McNeil said...: (Continued from above…)

I am not one of those. I want you to succeed and so should everyone else who believes in America.

Your country, and the world, is depending on you.

Good luck, Mr President.

Kind regards,

Piers

(/UnQuote); 3/31/17, 6:52 PM
Mike Wallens said...: After Pearl Harbor, FDR declared war and attacked some non-participatory country like Mexico. That was what the original commenter was saying about Bush and his ridiculous, wasteful, and pointless invasion of Iraq after 9/11. Saddam Hussein had absolutely no part in 9/11 yet Bush and neo nuts took the opportunity to drag us into a war that cost trillions and killed thousands of Americans.; 4/1/17, 7:15 AM