Gay Patriot Header Image

Decision Points: The George W. Bush That The Media Didn’t Let You See

I’ve just begun to read President George W. Bush’s memoirs — Decision Points. I downloaded it on Kindle last night and haven’t been able to put it down.

I’ll discuss more later as I read more (I’m into the summer of 2000 campaign period now.)

But one takeaway already is that George W. Bush is smart, thoughtful, complex, honest, candid and not the cartoon the media liked to make him out to be.

Like or dislike him — this is required reading!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UPDATE (from Dan): I’ve also been reading the book, agree it’s difficult to put down and posted some initial reactions here and here.

Share

64 Comments

  1. It’s worth remembering that Bush got a Harvard MBA at a time when HBS was famous for kicking out no-good scions of the wealthy; probably got better grades at Yale than Kerry did (we don’t know because Kerry would never release his grades); and is reputed to be a great poker player.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 10:38 am - November 15, 2010

  2. Uh huh, uh huh. Tell me how smart this man is because of his silver-spoon upbringing and despite all of his television appearances to the contrary. Gee, here I was thinking I should gauge someone’s intelligence based on things like coherence and thoughtfulness, but apparently the only thing that matters is how many pieces of fancy paper your family’s political legacy can get you.

    Obama went to Harvard, too.

    Comment by Levi — November 15, 2010 @ 10:56 am - November 15, 2010

  3. #2 Well using your standards Levi, I guess we can dismiss you as easily as you dismiss the President.

    I’ll likely be getting the book from Library, Bruce.

    Comment by The_Livewire — November 15, 2010 @ 11:02 am - November 15, 2010

  4. By the way, this brilliant book by this brilliant President is apparently just a collection of other peoples’ quotes and commentaries on this administration. How much use is Bush’s memoir if he’s just ripping off Bob Woodward’s book that’s been out for years?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/12/george-bush-book-decision-points_n_782731.html#s180908

    It’s like a ninth grader writing a history paper at 2 in the morning with Google search and a thesaurus.

    Comment by Levi — November 15, 2010 @ 11:21 am - November 15, 2010

  5. Levi, you only made yourself look bad with that comment. Mine was way ahead of you (your points, pathetically weak as they were, already taken into account or answered implicitly).

    But I guess that’s par, for your course!

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 11:23 am - November 15, 2010

  6. #5 was about Levi’s #2.

    As for Levi’s #4, it has already been well answered – hat tip TGC: http://bigjournalism.com/dloesch/2010/11/12/irony-alert-accused-plagiarist-arianna-huffington-accuses-bush-of-plagiarizing-his-own-words/

    I’ll give Levi a brief hint. Bush *actually lived* through those events. He was the first-person actor, that Woodward was merely writing about.

    Suppose Bush walks into a meeting and says “I’d like an orange”. If he remembers and reports it accurately in his book, he’ll write, “I walked into the meeting and said I’d like an orange.” If Woodward reports it accurately (note IF), then Woodward’s book will say, “Bush walked into the meeting and said he’d like an orange.” The similarity of language there is called *accuracy*, among fair-minded people. (Which Levi and Huffpo, needless to say, are not.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 11:28 am - November 15, 2010

  7. Wow, a new low in the anals of Levi stupidity.

    President Bush ‘plagurizes’ another author by using his own words. Another lie brought to you by ‘Brown people can’t comprehend Democracy’ Levi.

    Comment by The_Livewire — November 15, 2010 @ 11:30 am - November 15, 2010

  8. TL, I assume the misspelling ‘anals’ was a clever pun :-)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 11:32 am - November 15, 2010

  9. Yes, for once, it was.

    Comment by The_Livewire — November 15, 2010 @ 11:35 am - November 15, 2010

  10. Hey Bruce…

    I purchased the book yesterday,,, and I too am finding it a great read. I’ll be curious to learn your take of it as you get further into the book.

    Comment by Spartann — November 15, 2010 @ 11:46 am - November 15, 2010

  11. Btw, isn’t Obama another who has never released his grades? The embarassment, for Democrats, of being “dumber than Bush” must be overpowering.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 12:06 pm - November 15, 2010

  12. Obama — being a god — doesn’t have to release his grades; it would only lead to us infidel peasants criticizing him. His genius is evident in his ability to read a TelePrompter and spout tired left-wing dogma; at least that’s enough for Levi and his ilk.

    Comment by V the K — November 15, 2010 @ 12:26 pm - November 15, 2010

  13. I wrote a comment when this went up and decided not to make it.

    Then, along comes LEVI and totally proves the point I didn’t post. Here is Levi:

    Gee, here I was thinking I should gauge someone’s intelligence based on things like coherence and thoughtfulness, but apparently the only thing that matters is how many pieces of fancy paper your family’s political legacy can get you.

    I shall not take the space to “gauge (Levi’s) intelligence based on things like coherence and thoughtfulness.”

    George W. Bush does not have a coherence or thoughtfulness problem of any sort. He was elected President twice and served for eight years communicating effectively, coherently and thoughtfully. What he did not succeed in doing was reaching through the barrier of resistance, opposition and hatred. Few Presidents do. But, the opposition resorted to their usual old tactics of demagoguery and demonization. George w. Bush, who is sometimes syntax challenged soon became the talking equivalent of Jerry Ford as stumble-bum as portrayed by Chevy Chase.

    John F. Kennedy was an idolized gifted speaker. His Presidency never got off the ground. Lyndon Johnson was lionized until the liberal press turned on him and he became a crude, backwater clown. Jimmuh Cahtah was so brilliant, we were instructed, it was hard to fully grasp his intellectual meaning. Ronald Reagan was an amiable dunce who delivered a script with annoying effectiveness. Bill Clinton was the most brilliant politician ever and blowjobs in the Oval Office made the people who objected just a bunch of sorry, Puritan fundamentalists who should get a life.

    And along came George W. Bush with his “strategery” and well recorded and circulated linguistic gaffs. They are what they are and Bush admits to them and join in on the joke. His desk at Camp David had a name plaque with the single word “Strategery.” There is no greater gift than the ability to laugh at yourself.

    Now we have Obama who has the highest IQ of any President ever, although Imus could not get a number to accompany that claim made by the media’s favorite “Presidential scholar.” Furthermore, the clean, articulate Obama can not go off TelePrompTer for fear that he will say the wrong thing. He is also capable of spates of incoherence when he stumbles from uh to uh to uh. But, we do not hear anyone question this mighty man’s intelligence.

    …here I was thinking I should gauge someone’s intelligence based on things like coherence and thoughtfulness…but unlike Levi, I do not waste my time judging Obama by his coherence and thoughtfulness. I judge him by his policies. The facts are stacked against him.

    Levi could not recognize a fact about George W. Bush if he tripped over it. Like old shoes or jeans, talking points fit bigotry best. And Levi is a “class A” bigot. His mind is totally unfettered by the facts.

    Comment by Heliotrope — November 15, 2010 @ 12:53 pm - November 15, 2010

  14. Psst, Levi. Rachel Maddow has your new talking point for you. Basically, it’s that FoxNews never ever criticized GWB for anything. Learn it, love it, repeat it often; like the bogus HuffPo plagiarism talking point.

    Comment by V the K — November 15, 2010 @ 1:44 pm - November 15, 2010

  15. Bruce, W’s book is a great read –if you get to see him in person, it’s even more fun. GP readers can be a part of the excitement of W & Mrs dedicating the Bush Center at SMU by joining in a live webcast of the groundbreaking event tomorrow.

    http://www.georgewbushcenter.com/

    Our family was honored to attend the dedication of the Bush carrier at the end of W’s term. It was a day worthy of great honor of the sacrifice of so many -including W’s Dad.

    I’m going to allow myself to be pleasantly surprised at the reaction his book is getting (and a reassessment of W to boot) by some of my farRight friends who thought Bush was Obama lite… or Bush sold out the conservative movement with “McAmnesty”, etc.

    I know those folks still harbor deep seated dissatisfaction with several (or many) Bush policy moves, but in light of the last few men who wanted the job of CIC, Bush stands heads taller. And his FIRST book is an important one –as important as keeping quiet about Obama’s job performance.

    I’d vote for him all over again; no regrets.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 15, 2010 @ 1:49 pm - November 15, 2010

  16. in light of the last few men who wanted the job of CIC, Bush stands heads taller.

    In the same way that Prince stands heads taller over Wee Man and Vern Troyer. Bush may be a decent man, but his presidency generally sucked.

    Comment by V the K — November 15, 2010 @ 1:59 pm - November 15, 2010

  17. And the parts of the book where Bush does discuss Amnesty and Harriet Miers — two of his gigantic policy missteps — have an Obama-like tone of being unwilling to accept that his policy choices were flawed, or that his opponents had valid points. No, instead Harriet Miers is the victim of “Ivy League elitists” and the “wolves of Washington.” And people who want to secure the borders are, of course, irrational nativists. Like Obama, he seems unable to attribute opposing points of view to honest disagreement, but instead imputes bad faith on his critics.

    Comment by V the K — November 15, 2010 @ 2:15 pm - November 15, 2010

  18. V> “…And people who want to secure the borders are, of course, irrational nativists.”

    I didn’t read that in his book. Hmmm, imagine that?

    Do you have the coloring book version put out for MSNBC faithful? Or are you reading Bill Mahers’ “Cliff Notes” version for the deranged Bush haters?

    Honestly, you should wait for the usual suspects in the ol’ echo chamber to get fired up before commenting, V. It always sounds more convincing when an echo chamber pal first touts the “it’s the evil elites, I tell ya” line before you jump in with both feet.

    Gheesh.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 15, 2010 @ 2:21 pm - November 15, 2010

  19. And, the MM poo-flinging commences. A thread wouldn’t be complete, without it. MM, try following your own advice to others: stay on topic.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 2:32 pm - November 15, 2010

  20. Ahem

    “The failure of immigration reform points out larger concerns about the direction of our politics. The blend of isolationism, protectionism, and nativism that affected the immigration debate also led Congress to block free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. I recognize the genuine anxiety that people feel about foreign competition. But our economy, our security, and our culture would all be weakened by an attempt to wall ourselves off from the world.

    You see, to Bush, people who wanted the borders secured weren’t simply concerned with national security, and the safety of those living along the borders, or the costs associated with unchecked illegal immigration. They weren’t skeptical of promises of future border security due to a long, long history of broken promises from the Federal Government, No, they were just anxiety-ridden xenophobes who wanted complete separation and isolation from the global community.

    Trolls, take note, what Bush is using here is an actual example of a Straw Man argument.

    He also throws in a straw man argument about Free Trade. People, in general, support Free Trade with friends like Colombia and South Korea. But just because you ask whether being economically dependent on a hostile power like Communist China is a good idea doesn’t make you an isolationist. Questioning whether our relationship with China really benefits American workers does not mean you oppose free trade.

    Comment by V the K — November 15, 2010 @ 2:34 pm - November 15, 2010

  21. I will check this book out at the library. I watched the Oprah interview, and I have to say he is a very nice, honest man. I disagreed with his domestic policy, particularly with the bailouts. But you can tell the character of a man by how he treats his parents. I saw a very close, respectful relationship with them. I liked that he hugs and held hands with Oprah. Very touchy and personable. Not someone who is pretentious.

    Comment by Scherie — November 15, 2010 @ 3:39 pm - November 15, 2010

  22. ILC @ #19> “And, the MM poo-flinging commences. A thread wouldn’t be complete, without it. MM, try following your own advice to others: stay on topic.”

    Was on topic, ILC.

    You, on the other hand, is once again going off, off topic.

    Per usual.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 15, 2010 @ 5:20 pm - November 15, 2010

  23. Was on topic, ILC.

    Sorry, MM. Your style of poo-flinging is never on topic. Never, ever, ever.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 5:57 pm - November 15, 2010

  24. I had the chance to vote for Dubya a total of 4 times!

    I knew anyone who said he was stoopid has NO idea how much is required to pilot an early generation jet-fighter. {F106, I think}. The study, knowledge and facility required to fly a Piper Cub can be demanding, much less multi-engine, turbine-powered and on to full-on fighter aircraft. One had to be error-free to fly those and live.

    Best of all, I knew he would kill our enemies.

    Comment by Ducatisti — November 15, 2010 @ 6:23 pm - November 15, 2010

  25. I am reading Laura Bush’s book right now. It is really good and gives insight into their family life.

    Comment by PatriotMom — November 15, 2010 @ 6:42 pm - November 15, 2010

  26. Ducatisti, I think it was an F-104 and I agree with your larger point. I also read that the safety record on those things was not good, and Bush put in rather more hours flying them than he was expected to. He flew stateside, but that couldn’t be helped because it was the wind-down phase of the Vietnam War. My understanding is that when Bush entered the TANG for training in May 1968, the trained part of the TANG was in Vietnam, Johnson was still President, and General Westmoreland was recommending a further, massive escalation to the war effort – so that Bush joined with an expectation that he would have to fly combat in Vietnam. Those left-wing / Kerry slurs on his service record were bogus; unlike the Swift Vet charges about Kerry’s service, which were 97.8% true.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 7:06 pm - November 15, 2010

  27. P.S. Whether better or worse, I only voted for Bush once. In 2000, Gore didn’t yet seem completely insane, and I was still a Democrat. (Now an Independent.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 7:07 pm - November 15, 2010

  28. Suppose Bush walks into a meeting and says “I’d like an orange”. If he remembers and reports it accurately in his book, he’ll write, “I walked into the meeting and said I’d like an orange.” If Woodward reports it accurately (note IF), then Woodward’s book will say, “Bush walked into the meeting and said he’d like an orange.” The similarity of language there is called *accuracy*, among fair-minded people. (Which Levi and Huffpo, needless to say, are not.)

    That’s not what’s going on in these quotes. Here, look

    From Decision Points, p. 145: “I began my first Cabinet meeting since the terrorist attacks. As I stepped into the room, the team broke out in sustained applause. I was surprised, and I choked up at their heartfelt support. The tears flowed for the second time in two days.”

    From Woodward’s Bush at War, p. 65: “The entire Cabinet, meeting at the White House for the first time since the terrorist attacks, stood and applauded when President Bush entered the room. Caught by surprise, Bush choked up for a moment, the second time in two days he had lost his composure in front of others.”

    From Decision Points, p. 145: “We started the Cabinet meeting with a prayer. I asked Don Rumsfeld to lead it. He offered moving words about the victims of the attacks and asked for the ‘patience to measure our lust for action.’”

    From Bush at War, p. 65: “The president likes to open every Cabinet meeting with a prayer, and asks a Cabinet member to prepare one ahead of time. On this morning it was Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Among the things that Rumsfeld prayed for was the ‘patience to measure our lust for action.’”

    You’re just not an honest person if you’re trying to tell me that Bush (or whoever wrote the book) didn’t have Woodward’s book opened up on their desk when they wrote those passages. The problem is that the tellings are identical – Bush (or the real author) reworded Woodward’s quotes ever so slightly but told the exact same story in the exact same order. The odds of Bush remembering these events and deciding to use the same language in the same sequence are remote to say the least, especially when there are dozens of other similar examples.

    Comment by Levi — November 15, 2010 @ 7:08 pm - November 15, 2010

  29. (to be clear: what I call bogus here, is the charge that Bush entering the TANG was some sort of attempted evasion of Vietnam service)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 7:10 pm - November 15, 2010

  30. Levi, no dice. Bush was there. Bush told *his* story. To the extent Woodward’s account corresponds, that means Woodward was accurate. Praise Woodward.

    How do you know Bush, or someone close to him (Rice?), wasn’t secretly one of Woodward’s sources?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 7:13 pm - November 15, 2010

  31. (continued) Almost every minute of the President’s day, the people who attended his meetings, the order of business at the meetings and their key points, etc. are accounted for on written schedules and diaries. Bush would certainly have written from such documents. How do you know Woodward didn’t?

    I’m not saying it’s impossible that Bush read Woodward’s books to refresh it’s memory. I’m saying that crying “plagiarism” when a person recounts his own life and actions is bulls*t, a colossal waste of time. Just the sort of thing you’d fall for.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 7:17 pm - November 15, 2010

  32. Sorry typo, “to refresh -his- memory”

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 7:18 pm - November 15, 2010

  33. I am pretty sure it was an F-102. But the point remains, it takes brains to fly a fighter jet… especially one of those 60′s Era Century Series. I don’t the current occupant of the Oval Office even knows how a plane works.

    Comment by V the K — November 15, 2010 @ 7:28 pm - November 15, 2010

  34. HuffPo is really reaching on that plagiarism charge. But I guess if you are dim enough and sufficiently deranged with Bush-hatred, you’ll buy into it.

    Oh hi, Levi.

    Comment by V the K — November 15, 2010 @ 7:31 pm - November 15, 2010

  35. F-102, I’ll go with that and apologize for my error.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 7:32 pm - November 15, 2010

  36. V: Considering that HuffPo faked – yes, faked – a column “by George Clooney” in 2006, perhaps they are… you know… sensitive.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 7:40 pm - November 15, 2010

  37. And the “proof” of the “plagiarism” is that Bush writes about events in his presidency that were also mentioned in a Woodward book… about Bush’s presidency.

    I think the case for “Avatar” being a plagiarized version of “Pocahontas” is rather more compelling.

    And if Bush had portrayed the events differently than Woodward did, the dimwitted, deranged left would accuse him of lying. Guy can’t win.

    Comment by V the K — November 15, 2010 @ 8:19 pm - November 15, 2010

  38. After reading the quotes provided by Levi, all I can say is that if these are the very best evidence of plagarism that can be gleaned from the memoirs, the accusation is absolutely absurd. Both authors are recounting precisely the same events. The descriptive language differs, but direct quotes are the same, as they should be.

    V the K is absolutely right–describe the events the same, and W is “plagarising”, but stray one iota from the Woodward account and it’s “revisionist history” or a “whitewash.”

    Comment by disfrontman — November 15, 2010 @ 8:44 pm - November 15, 2010

  39. describe the events the same, and W is “plagarising”, but stray one iota from the Woodward account and it’s “revisionist history” or a “whitewash.”

    Sadly, Levi will never have enough intellectual honesty to admit that.

    Comment by V the K — November 15, 2010 @ 8:55 pm - November 15, 2010

  40. That is a great point. They would damn Bush, whether he matched Woodward or not.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 9:13 pm - November 15, 2010

  41. I think I figured out another reason the Left is pushing this ‘plagiarism’ thing. They have to console themselves. Over their midterm losses… over the fundamental failure of their ideology / impossibility of achieving their project… and, over Obama quietly proving that Bush was right along, on terrorist detentions: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/11/027683.php

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 15, 2010 @ 10:20 pm - November 15, 2010

  42. ILC nearly nailed it in #31.

    President Bush kept two diaries. One was personal to his thoughts and not government property in terms of the National Archives. The other diary is official and something he dictated. It contains classified information as well as all the other events and thoughts that recall the day. Every recent President has had this type of log/diary for immediate reference and for future use in writing his memoirs and recalling events for preparing speeches, etc.

    I have not doubt that Woodward was given limited access to this diary/log. It gave him the leads for research and more in-depth interviews.

    This whole idea that Bush cribbed from Woodward is laughable. President Bush has a huge staff of archivists at his disposal. Since he does not have his Presidential library open for his reference and his papers are now under the lock and key of the national archivist, his diaries would be his best resource in writing his book.

    Anyone who believes that Woodward dug up all the details about tears and stuff probably believes that the comatose Casey also woke up when Woodward sneaked into his room multiple times in the dead of night and told Woodward deep, dark CIA secrets and then went back into the coma when the doctors and family came to visit.

    Comment by Heliotrope — November 15, 2010 @ 10:38 pm - November 15, 2010

  43. Looks like the one thing we can all agree on about Bush’s book at this point:

    Levi is a moron.

    Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — November 15, 2010 @ 10:55 pm - November 15, 2010

  44. Isn’t everything tape recorded in the WH….how much of that is avail to the public…Woodward?
    Now as for Bush’s intelligence well he said he would have backed obama had they asked….hmmmm…….now you see that name….LLL? Hell even I knew better than to back obama…must make me a fuckin genius!
    Heard something rather disturbing last week about you brain surgeon George there…..heard he moved a CDC4 from it’s safe distance from society that being an island off of NY to a place in Kansas …that got hit by a tornado and turned the “stuff” into a vaporized weaponized lethal infectious disaster. Ya know those 5,000 cattle that died of heat…..Mmmmm……yeah well turns out it wasn’t “heat” after all and it was more than 5,000 and there were 65 people who apparently died a horrible death.
    So did he actually have that crap moved and if so wth for? And why on earth move it to the middle of the country?
    Apparently the show “the walking dead” came about because of a similar discussion as was had last week.

    Comment by left leaning lesbian — November 16, 2010 @ 2:00 am - November 16, 2010

  45. Obama went to Harvard, too.

    And yet he can’t seem to tell the difference between the Chinese and Koreans. I would ask who paid for him to go to Harvard? What were his grades? Where are his theses?

    Long of it short, I guess his secret is safe with you.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — November 16, 2010 @ 5:59 am - November 16, 2010

  46. Interesting 3L, you don’t happen to have a link to the CDC thing, do you?

    FYI, the CDC thing would have to have happened prior to 2003, since that’s when the comics started being published then.

    Comment by The_Livewire — November 16, 2010 @ 7:11 am - November 16, 2010

  47. LLL’s comment about a Biosafety Level 4 facility being damaged enough for what it contained to get out doesn’t make sense to me. BSL4 is pretty much the end of the world in a jar. We’re talking things like smallpox, most of the hemorrhagic fevers and other things that will kill you in terrible and dramatic ways. If thousands of cows and a good number of people were to have died from something like that it would have been all over the news.

    And I cannot believe that this is my first comment here.

    And holy crap, I just realized that the facility LLL is talking about is the one near where I live! I’ve been fishing by it plenty of times, I even went to college with a guy who worked there. It’s not a safe distance from society, as the seagull flies, it’s only about seven miles from Conneticut, half a mile from Orient Point, which puts it less than twenty miles from the Hamptons, which in the summer is a huge tourist destination. Oh, and that facility is only BSL3.

    Comment by Khepri — November 16, 2010 @ 8:47 am - November 16, 2010

  48. Left Leaning Liberal brings us this:

    Heard something rather disturbing last week about you brain surgeon George there…..heard he moved a CDC4 from it’s safe distance from society that being an island off of NY to a place in Kansas …that got hit by a tornado and turned the “stuff” into a vaporized weaponized lethal infectious disaster. Ya know those 5,000 cattle that died of heat…..Mmmmm……yeah well turns out it wasn’t “heat” after all and it was more than 5,000 and there were 65 people who apparently died a horrible death.
    So did he actually have that crap moved and if so wth for? And why on earth move it to the middle of the country?

    So, I googled “CDC4″ and there is endless stuff about colon cancer, but nothing about cows and Kansas and dead people. So, I googled “CDC4 Kansas cattle death” and got nothing to reveal this story.

    Therefore, it is clear as can be that George W. Bush controls the web and has scrubbed anything that impugns him. Scary, scary, scary. We should put a radio collar on him.

    Comment by Heliotrope — November 16, 2010 @ 10:59 am - November 16, 2010

  49. This just in. Ms. PuffHo herself is being sued by top left-wing activists… for stealing (dare I say ‘plagiarizing’?)… the very idea for PuffHo: http://hotair.com/archives/2010/11/16/peter-daou-james-boyce-sue-huffpo-claim-idea-was-theirs/

    I always say it was a happy day for the cause of human freedom… when Arianna PuffHoington abandoned the libertarian-conservative movement for the ‘greener’ pastures of being a socialist/Democrat.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 16, 2010 @ 11:36 am - November 16, 2010

  50. And holy crap, I just realized that the facility LLL is talking about is the one near where I live!

    I live about five miles from Fort Detrick. Google what goes on there sometime.

    Comment by V the K — November 16, 2010 @ 12:39 pm - November 16, 2010

  51. Welcome to the madhouse Khepri,

    Pull up a padded chair and get comfortable.

    Comment by The_Livewire — November 16, 2010 @ 1:23 pm - November 16, 2010

  52. Speaking of… where’s Levi? :-)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 16, 2010 @ 1:46 pm - November 16, 2010

  53. Was that on-topic or off-topic poo-flinging from our GP echo chambered ILC monkey? ILC, you are unashamedly hypocritical — we couldn’t find a better tool if the GP community searched the entire NJ shore.

    Let’s get back on topic, shall we ILC? And no, you don’t need a fresh handful of poo, you can leave the feces in your cage.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 16, 2010 @ 2:00 pm - November 16, 2010

  54. MM, I’m just quoting your own advice back at you.

    Stings you to know you’re a hypocrite… doesn’t it?

    Once more: Your poo-flinging is never on topic. Never. It is something that is always, inherently off topic. Now, *when I see you start to follow your own advice* about staying on topic, then I might be impressed. Get it now?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 16, 2010 @ 2:44 pm - November 16, 2010

  55. (Or maybe it doesn’t sting you, MM. I couldn’t say, one way or the other, if you possess that much conscience.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 16, 2010 @ 2:49 pm - November 16, 2010

  56. Hey, ILC, let’s trying staying on-topic for at least a single thread… and if you can hazard it, try not playing the failed poo-flinging nonsense… I know you don’t like being held to account by your intellectual superior but with all the nonsense in this thread by you, honesty and truth demand someone do it.

    Glad you’ve learned your lesson now. Try doing better; like Glenn Beck says, it’s the simple tasks we need to perfect. Glad to help you with politics, economics, historical interpretation or civics, as always.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 16, 2010 @ 5:39 pm - November 16, 2010

  57. Sorry MM, now you’re flinging your poo at me instead of V the K – at least I diverted you in that way – but, you are still not following your own advice to stay on topic.

    To help refresh your focus, the designated topic is:

    Decision Points: The George W. Bush That The Media Didn’t Let You See

    We’ve also gotten into some of the associated PuffHo / Levi hijinks.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 16, 2010 @ 5:58 pm - November 16, 2010

  58. FWIW, I don’t “fling” anything at MM, but he seems to take it personally when I pointedly criticize the establishment GOP or express an opposing point of view.

    Comment by V the K — November 16, 2010 @ 6:34 pm - November 16, 2010

  59. V, agreed.

    I think you understood the following point, but I just realized a potential grammatical ambiguity in what I said. I wish to eliminate the ambiguity, for the record. I meant (and should have typed) “Sorry MM, now you’re flinging your poo at me instead of *at* V the K…” In other words, MM started at #18 flinging his poo at you… now it’s been diverted to me… I have no problem with that, I was just noting it.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 16, 2010 @ 6:52 pm - November 16, 2010

  60. Yeah, well, I live with three teenagers. You think I’m bothered by what anonymous people say about me in blog comments? My skin is like Kevlar.

    Comment by V the K — November 16, 2010 @ 7:16 pm - November 16, 2010

  61. For me, it’s slightly a practice. I don’t have teenagers (except as an uncle, a role where I almost always intereact positively with them). But I have known a poo-flinger or two in real life. MM’s behavior is a bit of practice for keeping the Kevlar.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 16, 2010 @ 7:28 pm - November 16, 2010

  62. [...] Decision Points: The George W. Bush That The Media Didn’t Let You See (gaypatriot.net) [...]

    Pingback by I’m Not Bald Yet « Dawn’s Blog — November 16, 2010 @ 9:20 pm - November 16, 2010

  63. Perhaps if we read “Decision Points,” we can begin to reconsider those in power in their true light: as human beings. In our society, we have come to think of them as demigods and celebrities instead.

    I don’t believe President Bush should be seen as anything other than a human being. I haven’t read his book yet, but I doubt he wants to be seen as anything else. The book seems to have developed in his desire to tell his side of the story. The interviews he has given thus far certainly suggest as much.

    We are responsible for whom we elect. They are largely a reflection of our values and our concerns. President Bush held office at a very difficult time, and I disagree with many of the things he did. But he is a human being, and neither I nor anybody else has the right to expect divine perfection from him. It’s good that he’s written a book that reminds us he never expected us to see him as anything more than human.

    This is, incidentally, why President Obama is now showing himself to be such a weakling. All he seems to want to do is snivel about the mess Bush made. We all made this mess together, and we all must get out of it together. Obama has done nothing, thus far, to show that he understands this.

    “Your god failed you,” he seems to be saying. “So follow me instead.”

    If we ceased to think of these people as gods in the first place, maybe the rhetoric of the Obamas of this world would have less effect.

    Comment by Lori Heine — November 17, 2010 @ 2:07 pm - November 17, 2010

  64. Lori, good comment! (As usual ;-) )

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 17, 2010 @ 2:37 pm - November 17, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.