Jump to content

This pretty much sums things up..................

This topic is 6734 days old and is no longer open for new replies.  Replies are automatically disabled after two years of inactivity.  Please create a new topic instead of posting here.  

Recommended Posts

Atlantic Unbound | June 23, 2004


Politics & Prose | by Jack Beatty


Bush's Monica Moment


Clinton's affair with Monica called his character into question; Bush's true colors emerged on 9/11




This weekend Bill Clinton gave the world a look into his character. In his autobiography, My Life, previewed on 60 Minutes, Clinton calls his affair with Monica Lewinsky a "terrible moral error" that sprang from the "darkest part" of his "inner life." Lying about it under oath got him impeached by a Republican House led by Newt Gingrich, who was having an affair with a younger aide at the time, just as the voluble Clinton scourge, William Bennett, rested from his indignations with the Las Vegas chapter of the Moral Majority. The reckless impeachment peterrated by these pecksniffs crippled the Clinton presidency at a fateful time—when Osama Bin Laden was about to target the "homeland." Historians will doubtless explore the question of how far Bill Clinton's "moral error" and the Republican near-putsch contributed to September 11.


Next weekend, when Michael Moore's documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 opens, we will see George W. Bush's Monica Lewinsky moment. Philip Shenon, who covered the hearings of the 9/11 commission, described that scene in an article on the film in Sunday's Times.

For the White House, the most devastating segment of Farenheit 9/11 may be the video of a befuddled-looking President Bush staying put for nearly seven minutes at a Florida elementary school on the morning of September 11, continuing to read a copy of My Pet Goat to schoolchildren even after an aide has told him that a second plane has struck the twin towers.

Moore stipples his film with damning (and in some cases doubtful) statistics—for example, that Mr. Bush spent 42 percent of the first eight months of his presidency on vacation—and vituperation. But, Shenon concludes, while "Mr. Bush's slow, hesitant reaction to the disastrous news has never been a secret,…seeing the actual footage, with the minutes ticking by, may prove more damaging to the White House than all the statistics in the world."


That moment exposes Bush's character. It reveals what his press conferences proclaim: his incapacity. If he were George W. Smith, what job would he be qualified for? Bush's presidency can be seen as one long cover-up of the most obvious thing about him. A life of upward failure, of being his father's son, left him without "sand," my nineteenth century-born father's word for the residue of strength acquired by "standing on your own two feet" and "taking your medicine." Bush never stood on his own feet, never took his medicine—and he has never been his own man. He's the only president to be related to the Queen of England, and his biography is that of a "royal." Prince Charles would make a sorry prime minister. Like Bush, though, he'd give good strut.


Leaders show what they are made of in a crisis. Bush hid in plain sight with those kids. Later, hiding twice over, he used them as an excuse, saying he did not want to frighten them by ending the reading before finishing the book. Later still, and repeatedly, he said he saw the first plane strike the tower that morning (in fact, no one saw that live; the film was not available until the evening) and that he remarked, "That's some bad pilot"—pure strut. As the Wall Street Journal reported, he also magnified his role in managing the crisis, claiming he gave orders others gave. Conflicting accounts of Bush's communications documented by the 9/11 Commission now raise doubts whether, as he and Cheney told the commissioners, he ordered Cheney to shoot down any hijacked planes still in the air, or whether Cheney, in the White House bunker, acted on his own. Maybe Cheney persuaded Bush to stay away from Washington that day less for Bush's safety than for the country's.


Bill Clinton betrayed our expectations of how a president should act, then lied to cover up. His critics claim Monica was no discrete "moral error" but part of a pattern of character that showed his unfitness for the presidency. Yet, whatever his personal weaknesses, Clinton performed competently, even prudently. His controversial decisions—raising taxes to balance the budget, NAFTA, the China trade deal, less so welfare reform—were largely policy-driven, outraging various elements of the democratic base. Competence, prudence, policy over politics: these are not the words to describe George W. Bush's conduct of government. If we doubted Clinton's character, we were reassured by his intelligence and command of the scene. Bush lacks these compensations. His vaunted "moral clarity" is as much strut as conviction. He achieves certainty by arresting thought. The "befuddled-looking president" caught in that video is an emblem of his presidency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's pretty obvious: If Dubya hadn't been the son of a president, he'd have ended up at the local community college and he might have risen, on his own merits, to be the manager of a McDonald's or a Payless Shoe Source. Assuming, of course, he didn't just stay drunk/drugged and stumbling around Mexican border towns getting his ashes hauled. . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>continuing to read a copy of My Pet Goat to schoolchildren even after an aide has told him that a second plane has struck the twin towers.<


So what was he supposed to do, jump on a white horse and yell "Charge!" ?


I suppose the conventional wisdom is that he should have run for the limo immediately and taken off in Air Force One for a series of states with names ending in a vowel, which is what he did after thinking about it for seven minutes. I think the truth is that he was at a media event, and he was worried about tipping off the media present in the room that a national security emergency had arisen. Like, everyone watching CNN didn't know already. (He and his aides have said more than once that he doesn't watch cable news, so how should he know what they cover?)


The fact is that the barn door had been unlocked for so long that there was no point in running off trying to close it. If the military didn't have a plan for dealing with hijacked jets, it could come up one without White House review.


Meanwhile, Rumsfeld is incompetent, but at least he was decent. He rushed to the Pentagon courtyard and started helping the injured, until someone suggested he get to a safer place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ReturnOfS

>(He and his aides have said

>more than once that he doesn't watch cable news, so how should

>he know what they cover?)



That might be pretty close to true, but not totally. I remember reading someone that Bush has every television in the White House turned to the Fox News Channel. Has anyone else heard that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

In order to post in the Political Issues forum, all members are required to acknowledge that their post is in compliance with our Community Guidelines.  In addition, you acknowledge that it meets the following requirements: 

  • No personal attacks: Attack the issue not the person
  • No hijacking: Stay on the subject of the thread 

  • No bullying, hate speech or offensive terms/expressions

In addition, if the moderators feel someone is reporting content simply because if it’s political stance (such as but not limited to reporting it as off topic but not other off topic replies by those that agree with your stance), the reporting person may receive a warning as well.

Content that does not comply with the above requirements will be removed.  Multiple violations may result in a loss of access to this forum.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...