Bush is the Last Anchorman

RealClearPolitics.com ^ | 12-5-04 | Andrew Sullivan

[Qwinn]

For a while there I was starting to think that Sully might actually be able to write an entire article without having to put a plug in for his obsessive desire to walk down the aisle in a frilly white dress... but of course, just before the end, he delivers, as always.

Qwinn

[NCjim]

No, Bush doesn’t command personal authority. He is too divisive a figure for that; and too weak a character inside.

I found this a pretty good article until this statement. It's amazing how one closing thought can reverse a feeling built up over an entire article!

[highflight]

"No, Bush doesn’t command personal authority. He is too divisive a figure for that; and too weak a character inside. But this very internal weakness has led him to invest the office of the presidency with a form of protective strength. He understands the role and so he has largely fulfilled his most significant pledge in 2000: to restore the appearance of honour and integrity to the White House"

?Divisive??????? The media divide - but they cannot conquer - it's driving them nuttier (they were already nuts)

[highflight]

Forgot to note: Bush is not the last anchorman. Scott Peterson holds that title.

Bush is not the last anything! He's only just begun!

[alwaysconservative]

No, Bush doesn’t command personal authority. He is too divisive a figure for that; and too weak a character inside.

This was particularly amusing coming from someone as weak and without "personal authority" as Andrew Sullivan. It's a pity, because he is a great writer, and you sense that he is as wistful for social certainty and moral compasses as the next person, excepting his own personal practices, of course. I used to read Andrew regularly; it seemed he had raised his head above the morass of his personal issues and looked at the bigger picture. Now, however, he is simply a caricature of himself.

[Jaysun]

For a while there I was starting to think that Sully might actually be able to write an entire article without having to put a plug in for his obsessive desire to walk down the aisle in a frilly white dress... but of course, just before the end, he delivers, as always.

LOL! I must of missed it, but that's funny as hell.

[SmithPatterson]

I didn't understand that, either. Bush is a stronger character than Clinton. Clinton's dalliances gave us an insight into his character. If a weak character means you do your job, are honest in a relationship with your spouse, and go straight home every night then I am a weak character, too!!! Clinton was constantly trying to relive his youth and that is what got him in the end.

[onedoug]

Smiling Bump!

[afnamvet]

But the sad truth is it doesn’t really matter any more. Once upon a time Walter Cronkite, the CBS anchor before Rather, was able to turn the course of the Vietnam war simply by the authority of his reporting, the vastness of his audience and his broadcasting presence. He was an institution.

He belonged in an institution.

[Seruzawa]

The Supreme Court, perhaps the last institution to shield itself from public scrutiny, is still recovering from its abrupt and divisive political intervention in the 2000 election.

What?????? The only people who are still whining about that are the fringe whackies. Would that it were true. The Supreme Court remains the most high-handed and arrogant body in America today. The justices, all sworn to defend the Constitution, instead shred it at every opportunity. The lefwingers assault our moral center with abandon and the rightwingers remove our protections from overzealous police agencies at every turn.

[browardchad]

No, Bush doesn’t command personal authority. He is too divisive a figure for that; and too weak a character inside.

As opposed, in Andrew's somewhat pathetic mind, to the strong "moral authority" of Walter Cronkite?

Sounds like Sully is whining for a daddy.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

There was no "screw up" in Dan Rather's story.

[Malesherbes]

Sullivan: "But the sad truth is it doesn't really matter anymore." ("It" being Rather, Brokaw, Jennings and their ilk.) Yes, it's true, but not sad. In fact, it makes me feel good.

[madameguinot]

"...has clearly grasped the symbolic solidity of the presidency."

"...Refusal to countenance failure.."

"Bush is a rock."

"...a stickler for routine and punctuality.."

"..too weak a character..."

Sullivan certainly hasn't learned how build an argument!

[Harpo Speaks]

"No, Bush doesn’t command personal authority. He is too divisive a figure for that; and too weak a character inside."

When has Bush ever demonstrated a week character inside? And what has Bush said or done to be divisive? All the weakness of character and all the divisiveness I see is in his enemies.

[Max Combined]

"Bush is a rock."

My hands were steady
My eyes were clear and bright
My walk had purpose
My steps were quick and light
And I held firmly
To what I felt was right
Like a rock

Like a rock, I was strong as I could be
Like a rock, nothin’ ever got to me
Like a rock, I was something to see
Like a rock

[expatpat]

When has Bush ever demonstrated a week character inside?

He won't join the fudge packers.

[Ghengis]

A sign of strong character:

• No matter how your adversaries try to portray you, your true self shows through.  

• No matter how your adversaries try to impede you, your strength eventually overwhelms them.
  

• No matter how often your adversaries look backward for something to trip you, they always miss because you are striving forward.

Our fine President seems to fit these characteristics.  He's a stronger man than any of these wannbes, commenting on his strength and character.

[spodefly]

BTTT