EXCLUSIVE EXCERPT: David Frum's "The Right Man"

The Hill ^ | 1/8/03 | David Frum

[RLK]

And he offered them concession after concession.

---------------------

Dear hearts, that is not the way a strong and competent president works. You do the same thing Reagan did. You make your argument in such a way that it is overwhelming and then take it to the people. Bush hasn't the prerequisite study, the intellect, or the spine to do it. Since the day he began running for the office I have never heard anything forceful or incisive from him.

[Congressman Billybob]

This sounds like a very good book -- honest, perceptive and well-written. That puts it ahead of 95% of all the books that are published in any given year. I'm looking forward to reading the whole thing.

Congressman Billybob

Click for latest column on UPI, "Three Anti-Endorsements" (Not yet on UPI wire, or FR.)

As the politician formerly known as Al Gore has said, Buy my book, "to Restore Trust in America"

[My2Cents]

Bush had hoped that Daschle would grow into the Arthur Vandenberg of his administration, Vandenberg being the formerly isolationist Republican senator from Michigan who put aside his differences with President Truman on domestic policy to help pass the Marshall Plan and military aid to Greece and Turkey in 1947

By Daschle's ham-handed operation as a partisan sniper, he has lost whatever opportunity he had to go down in history as a great leader of the Senate. To join hands with the President to jointly do what was necessary to protect this country in the middle of a war on terror was his great calling and opportunity, and he frittered it away. Daschle appears to be a petty, disagreeable, and visionless man, and his short tenure as Majority Leader revealed his inherent nature. I suppose the reason he remains leader of the Senate Democrats is that the Democratic Party itself is petty, visionless, and disagreeable. History has bypassed Tom Daschle. It's a good thing, too.

BTW, I bought Frums' book yesterday. He'a a good writer, and so far the book provides as good a peek into the workings of the White House, and into the soul of Geo. W. Bush, as any so far written.

[headsonpikes]

Win the war bttt.

[My2Cents]

Ordinarily I'd agree with you. But Geo. W. Bush has achieved something even the Great Reagan did not achieve -- Republican majorities in both houses of Congress. I'm not willing to call Bush's approach a failure. The fact that the Democrats have been about as nasty as they can be, and it's been futile in terms of their megalomaniacal goals impresses me in terms of how Bush has been able to tie them into knots with velvet gloves.

[arkfreepdom]

Dear hearts, that is not the way a strong and competent president works. You do the same thing Reagan did. You make your argument in such a way that it is overwhelming and then take it to the people. Bush hasn't the prerequisite study, the intellect, or the spine to do it. Since the day he began running for the office I have never heard anything forceful or incisive from him.

Where's the sarcasm-off. You can't possibly be this clueless. He has made, many "backbone" decisions...the economic plan this week the most recent and busting his butt to get pubs elected in 2002. The latter decision was argued against by many because of the obvious risks...the main one being loss of political capital if unsuccessful. It was also a payback to dasshole. I can understand disagreeing with W on issues but saying he doesn't have a spine is....well...dimocratish. Pardon the neologism.

[copycat]

The leftist press is pushing this book as some sort record of "discontent" at the White House. Far from it, it seems everything I have read from it paints the President in a favorable light. I hope it hits number one.

[Cincinatus]

Dick Morris was right: Republicans are not so nimble.

Not so "shameless" would be a more appropriate word choice.

[r9etb]

. Daschle appears to be a petty, disagreeable, and visionless man, and his short tenure as Majority Leader revealed his inherent nature. I suppose the reason he remains leader of the Senate Democrats is that the Democratic Party itself is petty, visionless, and disagreeable. History has bypassed Tom Daschle. It's a good thing, too.

More to the point, Daschle crystallized for many people the nagging unease they had about the Democrats in general. So in November, when it came down to "Bush the fair and principled gentleman", vs. petty Tom and his petty thieves, Bush carried the day.

[Wordsmith]

Win the war, then we’ll see.

I'm struck by the echoes of this statement when compared with that of our last President, who also once said "we'll just have to win then." The stark difference of the context and meaning between these two statements - both made in semi-private to advisors - points out better than anything I can imagine the difference in the two men's characters.

I wonder if we'll hear on this thread from all those who yesterday were calling Frum a hack who was betraying Bush by writing his book?

[Quilla]

I too bought this book yesterday and will start on it as soon as I finish the Clive Cussler novel I'm currently reading. With all the negative hoopla this work is receiving, I'm starting to think it's merely spin to keep us from buying it. This excerpt makes me realize even more that President Bush is an all-American blessing.

[Remole]

And one of the most important insights of the book--and the one that will not be picked up by WaPo and NYT et al--is that Bush is NOT the genial idiot they portray. In fact, he is a pretty smart guy, a quick read, has a comprehensive vision of things, does not suffer fools, has a sarcastic side, etc, etc. In sum, the best boss you ever had, if you were lucky.

[trebb]

Dear hearts, that is not the way a strong and competent president works. You do the same thing Reagan did. You make your argument in such a way that it is overwhelming and then take it to the people. Bush hasn't the prerequisite study, the intellect, or the spine to do it. Since the day he began running for the office I have never heard anything forceful or incisive from him.

I have to disagree - President Bush made a campaign promise that he would do his best to bring both sides of the aisle together in a non-partisan cooperation. That's exactly what he tried to do with a quid-pro-quo set of agreements. The only problem is that there is no honor among the DemocRats - they reneged and stabbed him in the back. You can be sure that he remembers this and will make them eat their own sh*t, only he will feed it to them one finesse at a time.

[hchutch]

Very true. Still, we're doing pretty good, all things considered...

[RLK]

I have to disagree - President Bush made a campaign promise that he would do his best to bring both sides of the aisle together in a non-partisan cooperation. That's exactly what he tried to do with a quid-pro-quo set of agreements. The only problem is that there is no honor among the DemocRats

------------------------

Gee, it took you and Bush until recently to know that? I knew it more than 40 years ago. The last person I want to hear from is an idiot who believes he is going to have a love-in with the Democrats. The omly way it's possible is to sell your soul and the soul of the nation.

[section9]

Dear hearts, that is not the way a strong and competent president works. You do the same thing Reagan did. You make your argument in such a way that it is overwhelming and then take it to the people. Bush hasn't the prerequisite study, the intellect, or the spine to do it. Since the day he began running for the office I have never heard anything forceful or incisive from him.

Sir, your post is as fatuous as it is puerile. You did the same thing yesterday, and 24 hours appears to have changed the nature of your responses.

Bush was thinking in larger terms than simple partisanship in the wake of the attacks on America. That's why he threw the goodies at the Dems. It is not his fault that they reverted to their craven selves.

Reagan never confronted this kind of challenge. Bush has, and has done rather well. The Soviets that Reagan confronted were rational men who cared about perpetuating their power. The al-Qaeda who we confront today want to kill us all. That is an entirely different personality than your garden variety Party Hack who's puttering along salivating after his retirement to a dascha.

Your assessment of Bush is simple to refute. One wonders why you even opened your piehole to make such an ass of yourself in a short period of time.

If Bush is so stupid, why do we have a Senate majority? Why isn't that smart guy, Tom Daschle, running rings around him?

If he is so spineless, why has Bush renominated Charles Pickering? Why will Bush renominate Priscilla Owen and Miguel Estrada?

If Bush has no vision, why has he been the driving force behind a worldwide campaign to destroy three regimes: our friend Saddam, the Iranian theocracy, and the regime of Kim Jong Il in Pyongyang.

I'm sorry if Bush hasn't brought back flogging yet, so I guess you'll have to settle for the monthly offal that those ass-clowns at Chronicles magazine put out. However, the fact that you haven't heard anything forceful from Bush since he began his run at the Presidency tells the rest of us one thing: not only have you not been listening, you don't even want to hear.

Anyway, I won't be wasting my time on you again. You are as I described you: a reflexive Bush-basher. As such, your posts have all the intellectual currency of the Collected Works of Maxine Waters.

Now put a sock in it, unless you're willing to come up with something better than casual assertions based on your own biases.

Remember: Saying so does not Make it so.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[baseballmom]

Since the day he began running for the office I have never heard anything forceful or incisive from him.

Then you are not listening.

[Miss Marple]

Oh, if only you, RLK, with your blinding intellect, leadership qualities, and general air of optimism, were President! I know that we would be SO much better off, and that you would exhibit a degree of success and leadership, coupled with incisive comments, such as the world has never seen.

[My2Cents]

Very succinct, and I agree. In Bush, the nice guy won! A rare achievement.

BTW, I like that moniker: Tom "Petty"