posted
Haven't seen this online yet so no link, but just saw a clip of Oprah interviewing former president George W. Bush where she asked if he would join Cheney in criticizing President Obama.
From memory: "I'd like to treat him the way I'd like to be treated, and I don't think it's right for a former president to be criticizing the standing one." That's not exact, but it's the idea.
A very classy and welcome move. I was not at all impressed with Bush in office -- not in a positive way, anyway -- but I've been very impressed with his ease into statesmanship.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: A very classy and welcome move. I was not at all impressed with Bush in office -- not in a positive way, anyway -- but I've been very impressed with his ease into statesmanship.
posted
This is one of the few improvements I think our national politicos have made in the last couple decades. It used to be the case that former presidents rather gleefully seized upon the mistakes of sitting presidents, especially if they were of opposition parties.
Part of me thinks that's maybe a bad thing, not so much from a political angle, but from the fact that, really, the only person I think well-qualified to criticize a president is a former president. Who else really gets it that way? But I think for the sake of our national discourse, with the electorate treated as a polarized entity the way it is, it's very important that today's ex-presidents are a lot more classy.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wouldn't really want to hear Bush's criticism of Obama, anyway. He still bears too much responsibility in my mind for many of the problems Obama faces. I'm happy to see him doing things like helping out with Clinton in Haiti, but I really don't want to see him in the public sphere again- I'm perfectly happy to let him slide into the past.
Now if someone could just get Cheney to stop pretending he's an expert on the fields he @#$%ed up...
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have to admit though, you're at least somewhat curious about reading his new book aren't you?
I'm of a like mind, and while I generally shy away from biographies of recent presidents, I'm fairly interested. Hearing him in his own ghostwritten words speak about events past without the White House filter around everything he says is going to be interesting.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sterling: I wouldn't really want to hear Bush's criticism of Obama, anyway. He still bears too much responsibility in my mind for many of the problems Obama faces. I'm happy to see him doing things like helping out with Clinton in Haiti, but I really don't want to see him in the public sphere again- I'm perfectly happy to let him slide into the past.
Now if someone could just get Cheney to stop pretending he's an expert on the fields he @#$%ed up...
Wow. Even when he does something positive you blame Bush. Please get over it. It isn't like Obama has made any changes that would fix the mistakes Bush made.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Wow. Even when he does something positive you blame Bush. Please get over it. It isn't like Obama has made any changes that would fix the mistakes Bush made.
Heh, Geraine, calm down. I don't speak for Chris, but I think one thing he might be getting at is that while it's a classy political move, let's not heap accolades on someone for refraining from criticizing their successor for failing to fix the problems they had a hand in creating.
Not doing something bad is not really the same thing as doing something positive, and the strange thing is, your language hints that you're aware of this: you identify Bush refusing to criticize Obama as a positive. Well, what would Bush have to criticize Obama about? His failure to properly handle which problems, exactly?
Which is rather the point. Personally I have a suspicion that the reason Bush hasn't criticized Obama is because that's a big can of worms he's not very interested in opening, simply because Republicans are usually smarter in their politics than that, and if there's one thing that would have helped Democrats (I think), it's if Dubya had started weighing in on things again.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Condoleezza Rice said pretty much the same thing on Stewart a while back- basically, she's been there, it's hard, and you do what you can.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: You have to admit though, you're at least somewhat curious about reading his new book aren't you?
I'm of a like mind, and while I generally shy away from biographies of recent presidents, I'm fairly interested. Hearing him in his own ghostwritten words speak about events past without the White House filter around everything he says is going to be interesting.
Many strange revelations have already come out. He dissented on the use of force in iraq? He admits approving waterboarding too.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dunno about classiness, exactly; more like common courtesy, or perhaps consistency. This is the guy who made the presidency into the office of The Decider, remember? At least he's consistent about it.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: Wow. Even when he does something positive you blame Bush. Please get over it. It isn't like Obama has made any changes that would fix the mistakes Bush made.
No, I don't blame him for doing something positive (working in Haiti) or even something relatively neutral (making a stance of refusing to criticize Obama.) I just don't think he deserves high praise for getting out of the way; that's the minimum he ought to do, and no less.
As far as what Obama has or hasn't done with regard to damage done during the Bush administration, that's a whole other argument, and one that probably shouldn't envelop this particular thread.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I say if he has criticisms, he should voice them in a respectful way rather than holding them back, just like anyone else. I didn't have a problem with Clinton criticizing the war.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
