Former President George W. Bush on tour and unfiltered

George W. Bush in suit talking

Last week, former President George W. Bush started giving interviews in anticipation of his memoir, Decision Points, which will  be released tomorrow. So far, he’s said some pretty incredible things. A few highlights from his tour so far:

  • W says he has no regrets about using waterboarding as a form of torture to retrieve information from suspects in the 9/11 bombing.
  • He’s been touting a new tale of the formation of his pro-life beliefs, this one involving a fetus in a jar. You can’t make this stuff up. And remember, his wife Laura admitted in her book tour earlier this year that she’s pro-choice.
  • He’s calling himself a “dissenting voice” in the decision to go to war with Iraq.
  • Bush admits that he almost removed Dick Cheney from the 2004 ticket, as a way to prove that he was in charge.
  • He admits that Kanye West’s comment that Bush didn’t care about black people in the aftermath of Katrina was a low-point of his presidency, and Kanye responds by saying he connects with George W.

Finally, some parting words from George: “Whatever the verdict on my presidency, I’m comfortable with the fact that I won’t be around to hear it,” he writes. “That’s a decision point only history will reach.”

and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

6 Comments

  1. Posted November 8, 2010 at 1:36 pm | Permalink

    People are fickle, so I can’t say that even his reputation couldn’t be rehabilitated with time, but I think to a certain segment of the population, he will always be reviled.

  2. Posted November 8, 2010 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

    Au contraire! History is being made today, my dear W, and the fact that Kanye’s diss made you more upset than disasters like 9/11, Iraq, and Katrina gives History a head start on declaring you one of the worst presidents in our country’s…well, History!

    • Posted November 8, 2010 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

      I believe he meant that on a psychological level – it’s one thing for people to think you’re performing your job poorly, but it’s another for a person to blurt out and claim you have false motives and insincere aims.

      Imputing inhumanity or insincereness to Bush is much on the same lines – he meant well, just not in the way that you (or most of the people on Feministing) defined as good. I also buy into his argument that history isn’t defined in 10, 20 or even 30 years. A great point of comparison he’s been known to use is Harry S. Truman. Both presidents held office during a war (Iraq War, WWII), were judged as using too much force (Waterboarding / pre-emptive war, nuclear bomb), and both had historically low approval ratings (23% for Bush, 28% for Truman).

      However, history has since judged Truman favorably – he’s seen as a wartime president who made tough decisions that were morally ambiguous at the time, but turned out to be the right choices. Likewise, information or events may emerge in the future that showed that Bush’s decisions were the right ones (or the wrong ones). It’s hard to know without knowing how global politics will unfold in the ensuing decades. From our current vantage point in history, it looks like he made all the wrong decisions. But from a vantage point decades or a century later, he may have made all the right decisions.

  3. Posted November 9, 2010 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    at least he’s entertaining…

  4. Posted November 9, 2010 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    “Remember, his wife Laura admitted in her book tour earlier this year that she’s pro-choice.”

    Why is this relevant? I mean, is the fact that he and his wife share different beliefs supposed to make his “fetus in a jar” story weirder, or something?

    When Laura Bush’s beliefs went public it was interesting and newsworthy because it was a departure from the public image of her – now that she’s not First Lady she can feel freer to stand by her own convictions and that’s a pretty interesting discussion for us to be having. But in this context, using her politics to shame her husband’s hardly seems ethical.

    I don’t think it’s a stretch to also suggest that if the roles were reversed and we were talking about a female politician, and someone included her husband’s (opposing) opinion as a way to discredit her, we’d all cry “sexism.” In fact it often happens with Hillary Clinton. Just some food for thought.

  5. Posted November 10, 2010 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    I never thought Bush was evil. I agree with what someone else said earlier that he meant well, he just wasn’t the brightest person. My opinion of him is that he was stupid but he had lot of backbone and I think that is more important in a leader than brains. Obviously you want both but when leading a country a forceful idiot will get more things done than a smart weakling. The way the economy keeps tanking and the longer it stays bad the more likely it is people will praise Bush. People will compare how they live now to how they were living before and it will seem like Bush wasn’t that bad.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

194 queries. 0.302 seconds