Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Eleanor Clift: End Of An Era- Bush's farewell address was the president at his worst.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-17-09 08:48 AM
Original message
Eleanor Clift: End Of An Era- Bush's farewell address was the president at his worst.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/180005

End Of An Era

Bush's farewell address was the president at his worst.
Jan 16, 2009
Eleanor Clift


Other presidents have had lower approval ratings. But President Bush holds the record for the longest, sustained period of public dissatisfaction with his leadership. Almost his entire second term has been marked by sub-par ratings. He leaves office with 28% job approval, according to the latest Gallup poll—the lowest of his presidency. Such widespread rejection should provoke introspection, but Bush remains unrepentant. He interprets his dismal standing with the American people as evidence of his willingness to defy public opinion and do what is right, or rather, what he thinks is right, regardless of evidence to the contrary. The lower his polls go, the more correct he thinks he is.

He made a hash of his presidency, but he kept America safe from another 9/11-style attack. That's the core of his presidency, and how he hopes to be remembered. Here's his argument: It didn't happen again and it would have happened again if I hadn't done what I did, so stuff your criticism. The problem for us mere mortals is that it's an un-testable proposition. It might be true for all we know, but it's frustrating to evaluate arguments in the negative backed up by secret information. Bush alludes in general terms to threats warded off and life-saving actions his administration took because of intelligence gained from "enhanced interrogation techniques," a phrase that will go down as emblematic of his presidency in the same way "modified limited hangout" evokes the Nixon era.

Bush is making the same opaque argument on the TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program)—that for all the griping about how his administration mishandled the bailout, things would have been much worse if they hadn't done it. And the fact is that Bush's case is impossible to prove—or refute. It's a little like definitively answering: Is there a God? Like religion, a lot of what Bush is saying has to be taken on faith. Maybe there is classified information about threats that he averted that were clear and present dangers as opposed to the distant and prospective plots that have been publicized. And maybe the necessary information was procured through unsavory means. I'm inclined to give Jack Bauer the benefit of the doubt on "24" as he pursues the bad guys. I'd be more willing to cut Bush some slack if Dick Cheney wasn't running the show.

Pressed on the unpopularity of the administration's war policies by the News Hour's Jim Lehrer, Cheney was unbending in his defense of the Iraq invasion, even citing Al Qaeda links to Saddam Hussein that have been discredited. He suggested that the public reaction to what he considers hard truths are proof of their necessity and virtue. Lehrer kept pressing the question of whether in a democracy the adverse reaction of the American people over a period of time should be taken into account. Cheney dismissed the argument, saying the administration did what it had to under the banner of national security, and if the public didn't like it, they could have voted Bush out of office. Instead Bush won re-election "comfortably," a green light that served as a mandate. "The public gets to decide whether or not they want to continue us in office. Obviously, we weren't up in '08, but they certainly did in '04," Cheney said, seemingly oblivious to the damage Bush has done to the Republican brand.

In an exchange reported by Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward in one of his insider books, British Prime Minister Tony Blair confessed to doubts about the course of the Iraq War when he read letters from the families of fallen soldiers saying how much they despised him. When Blair asked Bush how he felt, Bush replied without hesitation, "I haven't suffered any doubt." The non-reflective Bush was on full display in his farewell address to the country, warning in Manichean terms of the evil that lurks out there, and insisting that the rightness of his cause should take precedence in evaluating his presidency over the heap of woes he leaves his successor.

The speech, with its recycled rhetoric, was Bush at its worst. Earlier in the week at his final press conference we got a good long look at Bush, and he was at turns defiant, funny, sarcastic, charming, and above all, authentic, a man who was in over his head and should never have become president. I can't begrudge him on his way out the door for grasping the one thing that is indisputable—that America hasn't been attacked since 9/11 even as he glides over the fact that the terrorist attacks happened on his watch. He takes credit for the surge stabilizing Iraq and ignores the terrible consequences of the war from the lives lost and the million displaced to the empowerment of Iran, a much more dangerous enemy than Saddam Hussein. He insists he's not isolated but he sees the federal response to Katrina as a success, citing 30,000 people pulled from rooftops in the 72 hours after the storm, and casting criticism as an attack on the first responders. He's entitled to his view of history, but it's not one many people share.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-17-09 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. Holy Cow!!! Somebody just posted in the comments that * should be
....well, go read it for yourself. I don't want to bring grief to DU or myself by posting that comment over here. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-17-09 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Wow! Someone feels strongly.
:wow: That will be deleted post-haste.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-17-09 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. I imagine that person will receive a visit from the secret service..
as well they should. That's just not the type of crap to post on the internets. :wow:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlancheSplanchnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-17-09 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. I did like this comment:
"Such widespread rejection should provoke introspection, but Bush remains unrepentant. "

I would also add that the mainstream media also has dismal poll numbers and instead of listening to their readers they continue to view politics through the lens of the establishment. Bush was as disaster for our country but you wouldn't have known it if you only relied on the reporting from the mainstream media. You can still see the disconnect in reporting and opinion pieces today, where those who advocate holding the administration accountable for their crimes are characterized as "liberal score-settlers".

Bush and Cheney are certainly delusional but so is our Congress and mainstream press.


.....

Thanks for posting the article--very good!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-17-09 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
5. The bushits allowed the worst attack
on the US soil since Pearl Harbor..

<snip>

"In his "exit interviews" Bush (and Laura) have repeatedly asserted that his major achievement is that "he kept us safe" after 9/11. Implicitly, then, he bears no responsibility whatsoever for 9/11. So there!

It is a clever rhetorical ploy. Unfortunately for Bush, facts--those pesky inconveniences-- once again get in the way."


<snip>

"Moreover, Bush did not even need secret briefings to know what was going on. Tom Friedman, on June 26, 2001, wrote a column in the New York Times, using the technique of making up a "speech" by, you guessed it, Osama bin Laden, mocking Bush for removing investigators from Yemen and removing the fleet from Bahrain just because of "chatter" picked up by intelligence, and castigating the Bush Administration for focusing on Star Wars and ignoring al-Qaeda. This was 10 weeks before 9/11. But, then again, George Bush does not read newspapers."

<snip>

"No, George Bush, you did not "keep us safe" before 9/11 or after 9/11. You ignored repeated, intense, passionate warnings before 9/11, all of which had a predicate in prior history. Even a mere columnist, without access to the intelligence briefings, understood what was happening. You pursued Star Wars at the expense of terrorism. You pursued Iraq at the expense of bin Laden and Afghanistan. Until the Democrats took Congress in 2006, you failed to enact the 9/11-Commission recommendations. Despite days of warnings, you failed to take pre-emptive action for Katrina. You failed to install competent leadership at FEMA. You incited more terrorism against the US by failing to fire Rumsfeld for Abu Gharib. You failed to send reinforcements when we had bin Laden cornered at Tora Bora."

<more>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/george-bush-claims-he-kep_b_154100.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorPlum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-09 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Here is a link to that Friedman essay, for those who want
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-18-09 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
6. Geez Babs, you always find the best stuff! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC