Global News : Passport : Ricks : Drezner : Walt : Rothkopf : Lynch
The Cable : The AfPak Blog : Net Effect : Shadow Govt. : Madam Secretary : The Call
Geroge Bush's straight talk
By Dov Zakheim
Many years ago, my family huddled around our television watching Lyndon Johnson announce that he would not run again for president. My late father said he didn't believe Johnson; that's how much Johnson's "credibility gap", as it was then euphemistically called, had sunk into the psyche of average Americans. Whatever else one might say about George W. Bush, no one can assert that he is devious, or dissembling; no one can doubt that, from his first day in office to his farewell address, he has always meant, and believed in, what he has said.
In his brief address, the president made it clear that what concerns him the most is the nation's security. He is proud that there has not been another terrorist incident since 9/11; proud that he created the Department of Homeland Security; proud that he has transformed the military and the intelligence services. He truly believes that it is the mission of the United States to spread freedom to every nook and cranny around the globe, to transform societies everywhere. I did not do a "word count," but it seemed that the word "freedom" was repeated more often than any other. And he remains an internationalist in the broadest sense of that term, strongly advocating free trade and viewing isolationism and protectionism as two sides of the same coin.
The President devoted few words to domestic issues, including the current economic crisis. His priorities were clear: his focus was on America's role in the world.
The President has often said that history will be the ultimate judge of his record. Indeed, many historians have already rushed to render a negative judgment of that record. But there can be little doubt that George W. Bush remains as comfortable in his own skin as ever he has been, and that he truly believes that, in the cosmic battle between good and evil, he has stood firmly, squarely, and consistently, on the side of what is "good."






"many historians have already
"many historians have already rushed to render a negative judgment of that record."
yes but historians are only just one of the judges of historical record.
Devious and Dissembling
OK, I'll bite-
Bush is devious and dissembling.
Bush claimed, in March 2003, that "We are doing everything we can to avoid war in Iraq."
That does not square with this, or with common sense and the public record. Do you believe it Dr. Zakheim?
or the old favorite:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
It is at best devious (and more reasonably dissembling) to claim that the British government has 'learned' something about which the US government is highly skeptical. This particular wording was an obvious (in hindsight), and certainly devious, attempt to finesse this issue.
Indeed, I find much of he says to be part of an un-straightforward, sly effort to frame the issues, often through calculated omission.
Are you serious?
Bush runs solely on instinct...he never thought about any of those things before he took office (remember compassionate conservatism?) and it took 9/11 to even acknowledge that the rest of the world existed...where had he been before that?...Mexico? You try to give the impression that we were dealing with a serious set of ideas coming from Bush....nothing could be further from the truth...he managed from his gut and from the gurglings of his mentor Cheney...the two of them, oil-men to the core, used a national tragedy to implement a bunch of half-baked notions that have all proven to be wrong. No terrorist incidents since 9/11?...tell that to the Londoners, Spaniards, Iraqis, Aghanis, Israelis, Somalis...etc. If he is such an internationalist he should never have left them out of his self-serving moral calculations. Good riddance....and who cares what history says...we won't be around to read it anyway.