Punditish  
 Punditish Home Page More Entries   Blogroll   Categories   Email  
George W. Bush

November 8th, 2006...

Respect for the Electoral Process
As some of you might recall, the President caught some heat a couple years ago for deflecting questions of accountability by curtly referring questioners to the 2004 elections, as if that settled the matter. His philosophy was simple: the American people had a change to register their misgivings, but they chose to back him and his party.

Critics generally saw this as a diversion from the main point. Easy for him to say, right? After all, he won. Well, now the shoe is on the other foot, and Bush appears to be singing exactly the same tune. Offered his first real rebuke by the American electorate, Bush has responded, within less than 24 hours, by accepting Rumsfeld's seemingly standing offer of resignation. When the American people did choose to express misgivings about the war effort, Bush has made a concession to that effect.

His post-election attitude has been consistent in both victory and defeat: when the electorate has backed him, his manner has been somewhat confident, and even defiant. When they have not, his manner has been more measured and concessory.

   »  Permalink





May 28th, 2005...

The Real Bushisms
I've never much cared for the idea of "Bushisms." A significant number of them are bogus, and the rest are largely inconsequential. I'm far more interested in the turns of phrase he uses on a regular basis, and this table does a surprisingly good job of breaking them down. Here's an example:

What he saysWhen he says itWhy he says it
"My job is to confront tough issues."When he's asked about slow progress on his proposals to change Social Security and immigration and medical malpractice laws.He's explaining that although it looks like nothing is happening, that's how politics works.

I'd expected a list of not-so-subtle jabs, but the list is quite perceptive and even-handed. These are the real "Bushisms," and understanding how he uses these everyday phrases is eons more important than poring over his verbal missteps.

   »  Permalink





April 29th, 2005...

Thoughts on the Press Conference
Well, it's done, and opinions are a bit mixed as to how the President performed. Andrew Sullivan thinks Bush was fantastic, though probably because he distanced himself from the far right a bit (which was, for sure, impressive).

He did well explaining the problems Social Security has; overall, that's a home run, and has been since the start. People may not be behind him on how to deal with it right now, but it's been firmly established that there's a problem. The "there is no crisis" crowd couldn't be any more discredited. And as long as people admit there's a problem, they're going to demand solutions, and that's inevitably going to favor the man who crusaded on behalf of the problem to begin with.

The part that bothered me most, however, came around halfway through:

Presidential Press Conference - April 28th, 2005
Q Mr. President, your State Department has reported that terrorist attacks around the world are at an all-time high. If we're winning the war on terrorism, as you say, how do you explain that more people are dying in terrorist attacks on your watch than ever before?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, we've made the decision to defeat the terrorists abroad so we don't have to face them here at home. And when you engage the terrorists abroad, it causes activity and action. And we're relentless. We, the -- America and our coalition partners. We understand the stakes, and they're very high because there are people still out there that would like to do harm to the American people.

But our strategy is to stay on the offense, is to keep the pressure on these people, is to cut off their money and to share intelligence and to find them where they hide. And we are making good progress. The al Qaeda network that attacked the United States has been severely diminished. We are slowly but surely dismantling that organization.

In the long run, Terry -- like I said earlier -- the way to defeat terror, though, is to spread freedom and democracy. It's really the only way in the long-term. In the short-term, we'll use our troops and assets and agents to find these people and to protect America. But in the long-term, we must defeat the hopelessness that allows them to recruit by spreading freedom and democracy. But we're making progress.

I don't mean to go all McLaughlin on anyone here, but this answer's simply wrong. Bush starts off well enough, pointing out that going on the offensive always involves casualties, but then kind of meanders around, and pulls it all back to his personal slogans of "it's hard work" and "we're making progress." Both are true, but they're also placeholder answers.

The right way to respond comes to us courtesy of Ronald Reagan, and one of his most famous speeches, "A Time For Choosing," which I believe originated during the 1964 Barry Goldwater campaign:

Ronald Reagan - 1964
Let's set the record straight. There is no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there is only one guaranteed way you can have peace--and you can have it in the next second--surrender.

The same thinking applies today; we can reduce those casualties dramatically if we withdraw our military presence from all corners of the globe, and curl up in our shell.

Though specific numbers are not known, it's believed that hundreds of thousands of American and British troops were either "killed, wounded or went missing" during the Battle of Normandy. Despite the tremendous loss of life, however, it remains one of our greatest military victories. There's more violence now not because our strategy is failing, but because the war has begun.

As we've constantly been reminded, the problem with fighting terror is that it's spread out; it's not concentrated in a single place, or limited to a single country. Some, therefore, find the entire idea of a "war on terror" ridiculous. But the fact that we're finding ourselves head-to-head with so many of our enemies is an indication that we're getting around this problem. We're coaxing our enemies out of hiding and into (relatively) open confrontation. Bush has been stunningly consistent in this regard, repeatedly using the phrase "bring the fight to the terrorists" or "we'll fight them overseas so we don't have to fight them at home."

More thoughts are available on the conference from two of my favorite bloggers, Lorie Byrd over at PoliPundit, and Mark Coffey of Decision '08. Mark thinks Social Security reform is dead, but hopes he's wrong. I'm not as optimistic as I once was, but I still think some kind of reform'll get through.

More still: La Shawn Barber skipped it, but points us to James Joyner, who's got a pretty good caricature of the conference up.

   »  Permalink





         Calendar


More Entries
» Selective Forgiveness
» "The Capacity to Be Outraged"
» Busting McCain Memes
» The Kodak Theatre Debate
» Hugh Hewitt Didn't Major in Mathematics
» The California Debate
» Reflections on the Rallies
» The Ironic Prescience of Matchbox 20
» McCain Wins Florida
» The Case for McCain



Blogroll
  • Instapundit
  • Andrew Sullivan
  • Tom Maguire
  • Decision '08
  • Patrick O'Keefe



    Categories
  • Blogging
  • Democrats
  • Economy
  • Elections '04
  • Elections '06
  • Elections '08
  • Entertainment
  • George W. Bush
  • Iraq
  • Media
  • Miscellaneous
  • Republicans
  • Social Security
  • Supreme Court
  • Technology
  • War on Terror



    Email Me
    Email Punditish
  •  Punditish Home Page More Entries   Blogroll   Categories   Email