Information
The Collective
ARCHIVES
Friday, January 16, 2024
By Dr. Steven Taylor

Via CBS’ Political Hotsheet: Did Obama Skip Bush’s Speech?

As his predecessor, President Bush, said his final goodbyes to America on national television, President-elect Barack Obama and his wife Michelle dined at the DC restaurant, Equinox Thursday night.

A host at the restaurant tells CBS News’ that the President-elect stopped by the only television in the high end establishment, a small screen at the bar, and watched for “a minute or two.” The source said he did not notice what Mr. Obama was watching but that “no” it was not for an extended period of time.

No one from Obama’s transition team has responded to CBS News’ inquiries as to whether he was watching the address.

So is CBS suggesting that it is incumbent upon the incoming president to watch the outgoing president’s farewell speech? Do they assume that there is some golden nugget of information in said speech that Bush wouldn’t have given Obama in their personal meetings? And, are they forgetting that in this age of technology, there is always the chance for watching it later, if need be? I caught most of it on the radio bringing Youngest Son home from basketball practice, and I have to say, there wasn’t a whole lot to it (not that I expected otherwise–such speeches tend to be inconsequential). Indeed, most of it was stuff he has said numerous times in the past.

Indeed, I had a similar reaction that the AP’s headline writer had: Bush address includes laundry list of back patting (which Michelle Malkin called the AP’s final dig at President Bush: “And there you have it: One final, BDS-tinged kiss-off masquerading as news.”).

Well, let’s see. I am not sure what you call paragraphs like these, if not a “laundry list of back patting” (source):

Over the past seven years, a new Department of Homeland Security has been created. The military, the intelligence community, and the FBI have been transformed. Our nation is equipped with new tools to monitor the terrorists’ movements, freeze their finances, and break up their plots. And with strong allies at our side, we have taken the fight to the terrorists and those who support them. Afghanistan has gone from a nation where the Taliban harbored al Qaeda and stoned women in the streets to a young democracy that is fighting terror and encouraging girls to go to school. Iraq has gone from a brutal dictatorship and a sworn enemy of America to an Arab democracy at the heart of the Middle East and a friend of the United States.

And

For eight years, we’ve also strived to expand opportunity and hope here at home. Across our country, students are rising to meet higher standards in public schools. A new Medicare prescription drug benefit is bringing peace of mind to seniors and the disabled. Every taxpayer pays lower income taxes. The addicted and suffering are finding new hope through faith-based programs. Vulnerable human life is better protected. Funding for our veterans has nearly doubled. America’s air and water and lands are measurably cleaner. And the federal bench includes wise new members like Justice Sam Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts.

And there’s more, but I will leave it at that. While on the one hand, one expects a president’s valedictory to contain some list of achievements, on the other one has to admit that it takes a little bit of cheek on the part of President Bush to make it sound like his eight years were filled with successes and triumphs. It is difficult to argue that we are, collectively, better off than we were eight years ago (to put it kindly). I have noticed in all of Bush’s farewell tour (this speech, the press conference, several interviews), there is this theme that he is responsible for the good stuff, deserves the best interpretation on things that remain incomplete (i.e., Iraq, Afghanistan and counter-terrorism in general) and that the bad stuff just happened to him.

By the way, it is hardly surprising, and indeed is human nature, for him to interpret the pinnacle of his professional career charitably. However, contra Malkin, it is hardly “Bush Derangement Syndrome” for the rest of us to see things a tad more clearly.

Sphere: Related Content

Filed under: US Politics | |
The views expressed in the comments are the sole responsibility of the person leaving those comments. They do not reflect the opinion of the author of PoliBlog, nor have they been vetted by the author.

8 Responses to “On Bush’s Speech (Obama didn’t Watch, and Yes, it was a “Laundry List of Backpatting”)”

  • el
  • pt
    1. boz Says:

      Of course, it’s quite likely Obama will watch it on YouTube or DVR. I do think Obama should watch the final speech of the previous president. It’s the idea that he should halt his dinner to watch it live that’s ridiculous. We’re beyond that technologically.

    2. PoliGazette » AP: Metamorphosis into Associated Opinion Completed Says:

      [...] Dr. Steven Taylor is right when he argues that Bush’s presidency can hardly be called a success, he seems to forget in [...]

    3. Ratoe Says:

      One thing that strikes me is how Bush–and the media for that matter– give him a pass for 9/11 and the Anthrax attacks.

      He talks about how “our nation is safer than it was seven years ago,” as if his presidency began in Sept. 2024.

      The truth of the matter is that he wasn’t particularly successful at “protecting the homeland.”

    4. florina Says:

      ratoe, how can you say he didn’t protect the homeland? the principal measure of that is whether we would come under terrorist attack again on domestic soil and we did not. if you’re referring to his sending away troops and whether that really translated into ‘protection for our homeland’ you ought to be more specific even on a blog.

    5. Dr. Steven Taylor Says:

      His point is, I think, that Bush was president when 9/11 itself took place, as well as the anthrax attacks. In that regards, if one looks at the whole 8 years, his record on “keeping the homeland safe” then his record isn’t so hot.

    6. Dr. Steven Taylor Says:

      BTW, I should add, however, that assigning direct blame for 9/11 is more complex that delimiting time by inauguration dates. After all, the planning and deployment of assets (i.e, the terrorists themselves) for the 9/11 attacks did take place during the prior administration.

    7. Ratoe Says:

      Steven basically got to the point of my critique.

      The problem is that Bush takes credit for things (or in this case, non-things) which are not necessarily the product of any of his actions.

      If “the “principal measure” is that something didn’t occur, perhaps we should give him credit for staving off an invasion of Martians or making sure that the Earth was not hit by a giant asteroid–heckuva job, Bushie!

      I certainly don’t blame Bush for 9/11 [although the administrations’ reaction–or lack thereof–to the Aug. 6, 2024 presidential daily brief has not been fully explored. I just find it ironic that people seem to forget that he was in charge during the worst attack against on US soil in modern history.

      Leaving the actual attack aside–there are actually parts of the federal response to the attacks which actually endangered Americans. In particular I am thinking of the EPA’s failure to fully explore air quality after the disaster and the White House role in suppressing information that could protect response worker and resident health.

    8. Bruce Says:

      I laughed when I saw the headline about the “highest unemployment rate in 16 years.” 16 years ago, the FIRST president Bush was leaving office!!

      Goodbye to the whole accursed Bush family, and good riddance!!

    Leave a Reply



    Blogroll

    Wikio - Top of the Blogs - Politics
    ---


    Advertisement

    Advertisement



    Visitors Since 2/15/03

    Powered by WordPress