Ex-Bush aide apologizes for 'groundless' remarks

Washington Times ^ | 12/03/02 | Joseph Curl

[kattracks]

John DiIulio, the former director of the White House faith-based initiative office, yesterday apologized for saying that President Bush's domestic priorities are determined exclusively by political considerations.

Using words uttered hours earlier by White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, who called Mr. DiIulio's remarks in the January edition of Esquire magazine "baseless and groundless," the first high-ranking Bush official to leave the administration asked for forgiveness and vowed never to speak or write again about his short White House stint.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

They read what they want, the same way liberlas and spinning press do. They don't even see it.

[betty boop]

It's the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis

DiIulio (and Suskind) reveal their arrogance and elitism in this disdainful remark. They are so out of touch with reality it's just plain nutz. Anybody thinks he can suggest this president is an inept "rube" and make it stick is delusional. IMHO.

[Thebaddog]

That's the one. I wonder where he is now?

[RedBloodedAmerican]

At Liberty Post.

[Yardstick]

My thoughts exactly. This was an exasperated left-wing snot blowing off some steam, using the same snotty BS that leftists continually recycle. It's the "gravitas" angle, again.

[demosthenes the elder]

Holy S***!
Somebody popped the whip on this fellow.

[DoughtyOne]

Smile. Thanks.

[I'm ALL Right!]

Shouldn't the title be:

Ex-Bush aide apologizes for 'groundless' remarks, hoping the damage is already done"

[FryingPan101]

"My criticisms were groundless and baseless due to poorly chosen words"

Yeah? I had classmates in junior high school like you.

[Torie]

An aide at the University of Pennsylvania, where Mr. DiIulio is a professor, said he had taken sick leave and could not be reached for comment.

Yep, the guy has a screw loose. What a pathetic performance.

[TennesseeProfessor]

Have you read DiIulio's original memo on The Drudge Report? He has high praise for Bush as someone who, unlike Clinton, genuinely cares for people. He has praise for Rove, "basically a nice and good-humored man". He has a fairly worded complaint that the administration is furthur to the right than DiLulio likes (hardly surprising a Democrat would think so), and a complaint that the administration doesn't spend enough time in policy meetings.

I hardly think it is DiIulio's fault that a biased reporter picked out only the harshest possible quotes from a basically positive memo and tried to discredit the aministration with them. Actually, comparing the memo to the article is a text book example of media bias.

[BibChr]

Hunh. A backbiting, graceless Democrat. Imagine that.

Look, most knew he was a bad egg at the time. Big surprise.

Dan

[Yardstick]

Well, yes, I did read the letter before I posted, and it seemed to me like a "the prez is a nice guy, BUT..." kind of thing, with the the "nice guy" part included mostly to lend his criticisms more weight, so that it didn't seem like he just had an ax to grind.

But after reading your post and then rereading the letter, I think you have a point. Much of the letter is very complimentary of Bush and seems genuine -- and, like you said, that fact was ignored when this story was reported.

Still, the "Mayberry Machiavelli" line is snotty, and I detect a whiff of the "gravitas" thing. Mostly, though, it was just fun to pile on ;-)

[Post Toasties]

I just read it, and the substance of the memo as a whole doesn't appear objectionable. However, DiIulio seems, for some reason, to have felt obliged to make public some personal grievances using pejorative catch phrases that he must have known would tend to obscure the worthiness of his message.

[TennesseeProfessor]

I think he tried to give a "fair" critique of the White House -- what he liked and what he didn't like about the administration. I agree it was bad judgement—he should have known that the media would use it out of context to bash Bush.