Posted on 09/19/2007 3:59:03 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
Last week was a strange one. The commander in chief, the president of the United States, took refuge behind a military field commander to achieve credibility with the American people. Through constant repetition of his name, almost an invocation, George Bush built up Gen. David Petraeus as the man who finally found a strategy that would work in Iraq. Because he said it would work, therefore, it had worked. Robert Draper's Dead Certain, a sympathetic portrait of the Bush presidency, reports that the president had insisted to his chief of staff Andrew Card up to the time of Card's resignation in April 2006 that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The president does not give up easily on something of which he is dead certain. He can't give up on it.
Therefore, the atmosphere and rhetoric last week were the same as they had been through the whole war. Victory in Iraq, Iraqi democracy, progress, fighting terrorism, brave troops, stability in the Middle East -- with Petraeus' name thrown in almost every other sentence.
Draper effectively dismisses the notion that the president is just plain dumb and that Cheney or Rove were running the presidency. Yet, he adds, the questions that some who served on Bush's staff had were whether "a man [could be] all that secure with himself if he felt compelled to assert over and over that he never wavered, never lost a wink of sleep and harbored no regrets? What bespoke his compulsive optimism, and was it, in the end, worth the loss of credibility?"
It is a question about which many Americans wonder. Why can't he change his mind?
Draper takes readers through many of the triumphs of the Bush years, starting with the destruction of John McCain in the South Carolina primary in 2000. Bush was absolutely certain he had won because he never lost his confidence. A reader might think he won because his staff played vicious mind games with McCain's temper.
Draper also details the Katrina fiasco and the failure of the administration to bestir itself from Crawford, Texas, while New Orleans was under water. The hurricane had changed course, Bush had told his aides while the levees were breaking. The president is still confident, it seems, that they did a "great job" in New Orleans despite the failures, as his staff argues, of the local governments.
Whence this sunny confidence that brought the nation into the Big Muddy and refuses to wade out of it? That forces him to assert that he made no mistakes in any of the strategy shifts before this one?
Some members of Alcoholics Anonymous will tell you that such behavior is not atypical in men who beat drunkenness by sheer willpower. They no longer drink, but they have not gone through the humility and the transformation of the self that the AA requires of its members. The president proved he could beat alcoholism without sitting around and talking about it (except with Billy Graham). I'm not saying this is the explanation of the president's sunny confidence about Iraq. I am saying, however, that it is a model that fits the data.
Those who are not troubled by the illusions that have marked this presidency won't need such a model. Those who wonder how he can possibly believe that at last we are going to win this war we should never have begun might try another model. In fact, however, the president's endless optimism and refusal to admit errors are, to put it quite bluntly, abnormal behavior.
Many Americans wonder: Why can't he change his mind?
agreel@aol.com
Soft core pornographer Greeley flaps his gums displaying for all the world his ignorance, yet again.
Fixed it
In His make-believe role as a Catholic Priest, Greely lacks even a smidgen of Christ’s Teaching.
I am ashamed to belong the same church as him.
Let him publish his knowledge of the Ring of Homosexual “Catholic “ Priests He supposedly has evidence of, then come back to reality.
In His make-believe role as a Catholic Priest, Greely lacks even a smidgen of Christ’s Teaching.
I am ashamed to belong the same church as him.
Let him publish his knowledge of the Ring of Homosexual “Catholic “ Priests He supposedly has evidence of, then come back to reality.
Does he know anything of Calumny and Slander.
Greeley is still a silly old man after all these years. He has successfully avoid maturing.
Andrew Greeley is a Marxist.
Ain’t Greeley more likely to take a limp-wristed slap at Graham? Like the dancer in a cowboy ruffian’s bear hug at the end of Blazing Saddles?
“Therefore, the atmosphere and rhetoric last week were the same as they had been through the whole war. Victory in Iraq, Iraqi democracy, progress, fighting terrorism, brave troops, stability in the Middle East — with Petraeus’ name thrown in almost every other sentence.”
Just what is wrong with that? That’s what we all want. It’s what the Dims should want too. It is what is best for America’s interests.
Greeley is a ........there are NO words to describe Greeley except PATHETIC LIBERAL.
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.