Has Bush Been Smart All Along?But now it appears that this diagnosis must have been wrong. Yesterday's George Bush didn't pause for a word and didn't get a point wrong. He was quick! In real time the exchange below showed a man in exact command of what he wanted to say: Q: A little earlier you said that you truly believe that the Democratic leaders care about the security of this country as much as you do. Yet just about at every campaign stop you expressed pretty much the opposite. You talked about them having a different mind-set— Where has this man been for the last six years? In political stance, he had none of the rigidity and cockyness that have accounted for much of the hostility to him. And in personal bearing, he was someone you could stand to listen to for an extended period. (Mild discordant note: His explanation about why he said before the election that Donald Rumsfeld would stay, knowing that he would go, was an exception to the rule I am suggesting here.) Might he have sounded this way from the start if he had had to work with a Democratic majority in the Congress (rather than steamroll a Democratic minority)? How much differently would the public, or history, have viewed him if he had? We'll never know. As he put it yesterday, sharply, and with a sense of self knowledge: Q: Thank you, Mr. President. If you had any do-overs to do— James Fallows is a national correspondent at The Atlantic. He was President Jimmy Carter's chief speechwriter from 1977 to 1979.
Discuss this article in Post & Riposte. |
Search
|
