I has it.
Ask me anything! (after 2pm, UK time, as I'm about to catch the train).
And no, I did not give Bush any of my money.
Is it true he confesses to war crimes?
Yes. He admits to ordering torture, though of course he does not consider it torture or a war crime.
any good bits about Cheney? Obama? Clinton?
any secrets we would have loved to have heard years ago?
any mention of Stewart/Colbert, the Oliver Stone movie "W", Will Ferrell's George Bush show, or any other public depictions of bush?
Any reasonably plausible explanations for his utterly fucked policy decisions?
Does he feel validated that the Texas Rangers continue to choke without his direct involvement?
Is it written in English?
Quote from: Cramulus on November 10, 2010, 08:46:20 PM
any good bits about Cheney? Obama? Clinton?
any secrets we would have loved to have heard years ago?
any mention of Stewart/Colbert, the Oliver Stone movie "W", Will Ferrell's George Bush show, or any other public depictions of bush?
Here is a Clinton/Cheney twofer
QuoteBy the spring of 1992, it was clear who that nominee would be, Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas. Clinton was twenty-two years younger than Dad — and six weeks younger than me. The campaign marked the beginning of a generational shift in American politics. Up to that point, every president since Franklin Roosevelt had served during World War II, either in the military or as commander in chief. By 1992, Baby Boomers and those younger made up a huge portion of the electorate. They were naturally drawn to support someone of their own generation. Clinton was smart enough to steer away from Dad's strengths in foreign policy. He recognized the economic anxiety in the country and ran on a disciplined message: "It's the economy, stupid."
I stayed in close touch with Dad throughout the election year. By the early summer of 1992, the campaign hadn't gained traction. I told Dad he ought to think about a bold move to shake up the dynamics of the race. One possibility was to replace Vice President Dan Quayle, whom I liked and respected, with a new running mate. I suggested to Dad that he consider Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. Dick was smart, serious, experienced, and tough. He had done a superb job overseeing the military during the liberation of Panama and the Gulf War. Dad said no. He thought the move would look desperate and embarrass Dan. In retrospect, I don't
think Dad would have done better with someone else as his running mate. But I never completely gave up on my idea of a Bush-Cheney ticket.
Amusingly, just before this, he referred to Buchanan as the "far-right commentator". Funny, given how reasonable Buchanan was versus Bush over the Iraq War.
He didn't like Clinton, as this wonderful piece of hypocrisy concerning John McCain shows:
QuoteIn South Carolina, we picked a new theme to highlight my bipartisan accomplishments in Texas: Reformer with Results. We set up town hall events, where I fielded questions until the audience ran out of things to ask. I worked the phones, enlisting the support of leaders across the state. Then McCain ran an ad questioning my character by comparing me to Bill Clinton. That crossed a line. I went on the air to counterpunch. The response, combined with a well-organized grassroots campaign, paid off. I won South Carolina with 53 percent of the vote, took nine of thirteen primaries on Super Tuesday, and rode the momentum to the nomination.
Yeah, comparing Bush to Clinton crossed a line. Getting Rove to claim that McCain had an illegitimate black child though, well...all's fair in love and war, right?
However, he is mostly respectful of Clinton. You may not be aware of this, but Clinton and Bush Sr are quite good friends, and it would not be good for the former Boy Emperor to cross his daddy, who could probably still kick his ass at his advanced age.
This suggests Cheney was calling the shots during the response to 9/11
QuoteOne report I received proved true. A fourth plane had gone down somewhere in Pennsylvania. "Did we shoot it down, or did it crash?" I asked Dick Cheney. Nobody knew. I felt sick to my stomach. Had I ordered the death of those innocent Americans?
Dick Cheney, voice of moderation (in 2001):
QuoteDick Cheney understood the threat of Saddam Hussein and believed we had to address it. "But now is not a good time to do it," he said. "We would lose our momentum. Right now people have to choose between the United States and the bad guys."
Dick Cheney, desperate to unleash the dogs of war (2002):
QuoteFor months, the National Security Council had been meeting almost daily to discuss Iraq. I knew where all my advisers stood. Dick Cheney was concerned about the slow diplomatic process. He warned that Saddam Hussein could be using the time to produce weapons, hide weapons, or plot an attack. At one of our weekly lunches that winter, Dick asked medirectly, "Are you going to take care of this guy, or not?" That was his way of saying he thought we had given diplomacy enough time. I appreciated Dick's blunt advice. I told him I wasn't ready to move yet. "Okay, Mr. President, it's your call," he said. Then he deployed one of his favorite lines. "That's why they pay you the big bucks," he said with a gentle smile.
Dick Cheney, voice of insanity (2006):
QuoteIsrael made matters worse. In the third week of the conflict, Israeli bombers destroyed an apartment complex in the Lebanese city of Qana. Twenty-eight civilians were killed, more than half of them children. Prime Minister Siniora was furious. Arab leaders viciously condemned the bombing, the carnage of which played around the clock on Middle Eastern TV. I started to worry that Israel's offensive might topple Prime Minister Siniora's democratic government.
I called a National Security Council meeting to discuss our strategy. The disagreement within the team was heated. "We need to let the Israelis finish off Hezbollah," Dick Cheney said. "If you do that," Condi replied, "America will be dead in the Middle East." She recommended we seek a UN resolution calling for a ceasefire and deploying a multinational peacekeeping force.
As for Obama, he said he preferred McCain but that:
QuoteAs an Obama win looked increasingly likely, I started to think more about what it would mean for an African American to win the presidency. I got an unexpected glimpse a few days before the election. An African American member of the White House residence staff brought his twin sons, age six, to the Oval Office for a farewell photo. One glanced up around the room and blurted out, "Where's Barack Obama?"
"He's not here yet," I deadpanned.
On election night, I was moved by images of black men and women crying on TV. More than one said, "I never thought I would live to see this day."
I called the president-elect to congratulate him. I also called John McCain to say he was a good man who'd given the race his best shot. Both were gracious. I told the president-elect I looked forward to welcoming him to the White House.
When I hung up the phone, I said a prayer that all would be well during my successor's time. I thought about one of my favorite presidential quotes, from a letter John Adams wrote to his wife, Abigail: "I pray Heaven to bestow the best blessings on this house and all that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof." His words are carved into the mantel above the fireplace of the State Dining Room.
And
QuoteSix days after the election, I met with President-elect Obama in the Oval Office. Barack was gracious and confident. It seemed he felt the same sense of wonderment I had eight years earlier when Bill Clinton welcomed me to the Oval Office as president-elect. I could also see the sense of responsibility start to envelop him. He asked questions about how I structured my day and organized my staff. We talked about foreign policy, including America's relationships with China, Saudi Arabia, and other major powers. We also discussed the economy, including the auto companies' trouble.
He doesnt mention Stewart, Colbert or popular culture at all.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD on November 10, 2010, 08:47:53 PM
Any reasonably plausible explanations for his utterly fucked policy decisions?
He reported in his interview with Matt Lauer that has mother kept a fetus of a child she miscarried in a jar and showed it to him. I think it explains a lot.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 10, 2010, 09:06:19 PM
Does he feel validated that the Texas Rangers continue to choke without his direct involvement?
Apparently buying the Rangers "sharpened his management skills". This explains a lot.
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 10, 2010, 09:14:54 PM
Is it written in English?
Edited in English, written in Engrish.
is it written in crayon?
WAS IT
dick-tated?
Does he mention keeping the smooth-running machine that is the US economy in perfect condition only to watch in horror as Obama destroyed it in a single blow?
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on November 12, 2010, 03:06:31 AM
is it written in crayon?
god damnit that was awesome.
If I had been attempting to drink a beverage when I read this it would have looked like that one picture of someone spitting out whatever it was they were drinking.
Quote from: E.O.T. on November 12, 2010, 04:02:25 AM
WAS IT
dick-tated?
honerable mention.. no current emote for that im afraid.
Quote from: Subetai on November 11, 2010, 01:13:49 PM
Vice President Dan Quayle, whom I liked and respected...
:facepalm:
Quote from: Alty on November 12, 2010, 04:12:37 AM
Does he mention keeping the smooth-running machine that is the US economy in perfect condition only to watch in horror as Obama destroyed it in a single blow?
:teabagger1:
Actually, he is very respectful of Obama. To the point that he has said if he was allowed to endorse Obama over McCain, he would have.
Hmm, funny that. Bush I and Clinton both buddies. Bush II and Obama on friendly and respectful terms with each other. It's almost like all the partisan posturing the parties engage in is designed for the camera and to play to particular audiences...
Put the politics and policies aside. Which may not be super realistic. But I actually think that GWB is probably a fairly decent guy. I'm just talking purely on the level of the old cliche "someone you could have a beer with".
I think he had the same problem Obama is having now. Letting their uncertainty become a liability as they cede decision making to others. I think, maybe, if GWB would've had more stones, maybe he would've stood down all of the hawks surrounding him. Same with Obama, maybe if he wasn't surrounded by a bunch of wishy-washy capitulators, we would've had the public option for health care reform.
Or maybe I'm giving both way more benefit of the doubt than they deserve. Entirely possible.
I think it is perfect evidence that the worst excesses of human nature can easily be replicated in someone who is probably a nice guy you wouldn't mind having a few drinks with.
And that would be a worrying conclusion, if I hadn't already come to it several years ago.
Yep, especially considering those Presidents who are generally looked upon as Great Presidents were definitely not choir-boys. Or in the case of someone like Lincoln, just plain strange.
I've always found the 'W is someone I can have a beer with' to be amusing, since he's an admitted alcoholic...
I think that a lot of humans are cool in the "have a beer with" way... its just once they get with a bunch of other people that share some kind of dogma that everything goes to shit.
http://twitter.com/jasonpinter/statuses/2775272881393664
QuoteHefty first day book sales: Diary of a Wimpy Kid #5: 375,000 copies. George W. Bush's Decision Points: 220,000 (including ebooks).
:lulz:
Bush's book is oddly slim, as well. You have to think, this is not just about his Presidency, but his entire life. And it only runs to 350 pages on my laptop. And because of the way it is formatted, it is closer to 300 pages.
By contrast, the biography of the Soviet Ambassodor to the United States, which I also own in ebook format, is nearly 900 pages long.
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on November 13, 2010, 12:19:33 AM
http://twitter.com/jasonpinter/statuses/2775272881393664
QuoteHefty first day book sales: Diary of a Wimpy Kid #5: 375,000 copies. George W. Bush's Decision Points: 220,000 (including ebooks).
:lulz:
Wait. Those aren't the same book?
:rimshot:
C'mon people, that joke practically writes itself.
Quote from: Subetai on November 13, 2010, 12:03:50 PM
Bush's book is oddly slim, as well. You have to think, this is not just about his Presidency, but his entire life. And it only runs to 350 pages on my laptop. And because of the way it is formatted, it is closer to 300 pages.
By contrast, the biography of the Soviet Ambassodor to the United States, which I also own in ebook format, is nearly 900 pages long.
How long did he serve? And how many useless and uninteresting stories/facts included?
Admittedly, he served for most of the Cold War. But he mostly discusses actual Soviet policy and what the Soviets thought and what he thought and what the Americans thought and how he tried to balance all that without inadvertantly blowing the world up.
So probably a bad example.
However, Tony Blair's bio runs to 480 pages, and while Blair served two more years than Bush as a head of state, his life before politics is mostly very boring and of no interest to anyone, including Blair himself. Of course, credit to Bush, he did not include cringingly bad sex scenes with his wife in Decision Points, unlike Blair did with his biography.
Bush just seems to lack any real attention to detail. He covers vastly important topics, like the breach in opinion between the State Department, the Office of Vice-President and the Pentagon over Iraq, in two or three sentences. It's like he is writing an essay for University, a general overview of What I Did During My Presidency. There is very little introspection or curiousity displayed. Other insider accounts are far superior to this.
There wasn't much to spoil. Scott McClellan's book is much superior in telling embarassing facts, and Douglas Feith's book is much more insane.
Im not sure how to phrase it or convey it but...
Based on his writing style, can you "feel" his stupidity? The glossing over major issues is along the lines of willfull obfuscation, or is it merely his lack of capacity to express discourse over a concrete thinking level?
For further reference, this is what i mean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_cognitive_development#Concrete_operational_stage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_cognitive_development#Concrete_operational_stage)
Its hard to say. He doesn't seem obviously stupid, but it's entirely possible his stupidity stems from not looking into things too closely.
Of course, there being a ghost writer involved doesnt help matters either.