Bush v. Harry Truman.
Bush v. Harry Truman.
McClatchy describes Friday’s meeting between Bush and congressional leaders:
Bush began his talk by comparing himself to President Harry S Truman, who launched the Truman Doctrine to fight communism, got bogged down in the Korean War and left office unpopular.
Bush said that “in years to come they realized he was right and then his doctrine became the standard for America,” recalled Senate Majority Whip-elect Richard Durbin, D-Ill. “He’s trying to position himself in history and to justify those who continue to stand by him, saying sometimes if you’re right you’re unpopular, and be prepared for criticism.”
Durbin said he challenged Bush’s analogy, reminding him that Truman had the NATO alliance behind him and negotiated with his enemies at the United Nations. Durbin said that’s what the Iraq Study Group is recommending that Bush do now – work more with allies and negotiate with adversaries on Iraq.
Bush, Durbin said, “reacted very strongly. He got very animated in his response” and emphasized that he is “the commander in chief.”
(Via Washington Monthly)
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bush is NO Harry Truman > lol. He is more like that fool Andrew Johnson who almost got impeached, but shy of one vote in the Senate.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:15 pmDubya is losing his mind and it shows!
I knew Harry Truman, and Chimp, you’re no Harry Truman.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:16 pmA hairy chimp, yes, Truman No.
Then he cried for his “mommy”, ran and hid under his desk and sucked his thumb while rocking back and forth, sobbing…
December 9th, 2006 at 1:17 pmBush probably tried to grab Durbins neck, like he did to the German Chancelor, then when that failed he tried to get sexual with Durbin.
When will the Congress investigate to find out who Jeff Gannon slept with in the White House?
December 9th, 2006 at 1:24 pmHis desperation for approval is palpable….
December 9th, 2006 at 1:24 pmHe’s the Dictator-in-chief.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:25 pmBush uses commander in chief a lot. Somehow I don’t think it means what he thinks it means.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:27 pmKind of like Angelina
December 9th, 2006 at 1:28 pmlollollol.
this is really some funny shit.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:31 pmhe(bushyboy)has no problem putting his ass out there to get whipped like a fool that he is.
Bush’s puerile response is reminiscent of the bigoted juror in the classic film Twelve Angry Men when he [Ed Begley] cries out: “Facts, facts, I’m tired of facts! You can twist those facts any way you want, you know what I mean?”
December 9th, 2006 at 1:32 pmErroll – reminds me more of the bandito in Blazing Saddles (Treasure of the Sierra Madres) who cries Badges! (I) don’ need no stinkin badges!! I’m the commander in brief!
December 9th, 2006 at 1:36 pmShould we be worried about his mental health?
December 9th, 2006 at 1:48 pmWhat is going on in his head?
He’s worried about his legacy? The dead soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines have no legacy. THEY ARE DEAD.
They will not grow old and worry about what people might think.
They are dead.
That is what he should be concerned about.
I’m The Commander In Chief, not You. I’m the Decider! I’m the Decider! I’m the Decider! I’m The Commander In Chief! I’m The Command….mblphm
December 9th, 2006 at 1:48 pm*flails around while being dragged off to rubber room*
Someone get the preznit a crayon…he wants to color
Bush is loonier than Nixon was in the darkest days of Watergate. Go talk to #41’s portrait, Sonny.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:52 pmA certified nut in the WH for sure.When will someone tell this jackass(Bush) to his face that he is indeed delusional ?Oh ! I forgot the british journalist did it at his last press conference.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:53 pm#His desperation for approval is palpable….
Comment by unbelievable — December 9, 2006 @ 1:24 pm
I think that is the problem . . . he doesn’t need approval. He is the Bully in Chief, always has been a bully and is comfortable being a bully. Approval? That’s for sissies.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:53 pmBush grows more delusional with time. Now he thinks he’s Harry Truman and gets all bent out of shape when contradicted.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:55 pmHis presidency is in the toilet and his legacy will be flushed down the same hole – would that we could rid ourselves of him with a quick flush.
Will someone please tell Bush that under our Constitution he is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, he is NOT the commander-in-chief of the people of the United States.
December 9th, 2006 at 2:08 pmThe only way for Bush to save face for America is to go to jail
No Bush your just an mass murdering oil thief , who must be brought to justice
December 9th, 2006 at 2:09 pmI think this is a major part of his delusion … he is only looking at the popularity of other presidents, and believes that like them history will vindicate him … and this is why he is going to bulldoze his way to do whatever he wants despite public opinion …
December 9th, 2006 at 2:21 pmthe thing is, he doesn’t understand history. The Iraq quagmire is a product of Bush’s incompetance … Korea, however was a leftover from World War II, just like the so called Iron Curtain in Europe. We had an obligation to fight that war, and it was a stalemate.
I must also point out that many made the compared Vietnam to Korea as a reason to fight the communists there… the difference was Vietnam was not a by product of WWII, as was Korea. Vietnam was a product of failed colonial policy that had caused conflict since before WWI.
Iraq, if anything, is a product of colonial policy and the invasion of that country by Bush is a continuation of colonial policy. What Bush fails to realize, though is that colonialization via military intervention and occupation was already proven ineffective by the British and the French.
Maybe if he had focused on studying history as an undergrad, rather than just partying, he would understand this.
The joke’s on Durbin, what was he thinking? How the hell do you engae in dialogue
December 9th, 2006 at 2:49 pmWatch the fun in ‘07 as Bush gets eaten alive by his own party, scared to death of running in ‘08 on Iraq. There appears to as yet be no political will to extract our military from Iraq. The nasty little truth is that this is just fine with the Democrats, because the longer this goes on the more likely the Republicans are to be devastated in ‘08. It’s going to be amazing to watch a president be marginalized by his own party, and with him Cheney and Condi. Thank God.
December 9th, 2006 at 2:57 pmI think Bush may have something here? Harry Truman said:
December 9th, 2006 at 3:17 pm“If you cannot convince them, confuse them.”
Bush: “I am the history major!”
December 9th, 2006 at 3:22 pmIt’s no wonder his dad acted like a blithering idiot….Must be agonizing to watch your idiot spawn destroy everything that great historical figures built. This retard will go down in history as the biggest failure ever.
December 9th, 2006 at 3:26 pmBush is a sociopath…
* Has an exaggerated sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
December 9th, 2006 at 3:41 pm* Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
* Believes he is “special” and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
* Requires excessive admiration
* Has a sense of entitlement
* Selfishly takes advantage of others to achieve his own ends
* Lacks empathy
* Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him
* Constantly shows arrogant, haughty, patronizing, or contemptuous behaviors or attitudes
Didn’t Truman say something to the effect of…”The Buck stops here.”?
Bush hasn’t taken responsibility for a single bit of the unmitigated disaster that is his presidency and will be his legacy. In the presser this week, when asked if he’d admit that his war was a disaster, the closest Bush would come to taking responsibility was.. “We’ve not been successful as fast as I thought we would.”
What a pathetic moron.
December 9th, 2006 at 3:44 pmLots of bucks stop at W’s desk! He is lining his pockets with them. That is what makes him think that he is like Truman.
December 9th, 2006 at 3:55 pmif you’re right you’re unpopular, and be prepared for criticism.
Wrong. That’s like the quacks who seek to justify their claptrap by saying “they also laughed at Christopher Columbus”.
It is interesting how in Pres Bush’s mind, criticism validates his actions. It takes a load of wishful thinking to twist reality like that.
Maybe this is the reason he cannot bring himself to admit a mistake: The more his confronted with reality, the more he will deny it.
In the meantime, the carnage continues in Iraq.
December 9th, 2006 at 4:08 pmif dick durbin was more truthful, he would have pis-sed on bush’s lap and told him that he is in fact hitler incarnated and couldn’t carry harry truman’s bowel movement in a pot with two handles….
but, then again, perhaps that is why i am not a senator….
December 9th, 2006 at 5:12 pmFirst it was Churchill, now Truman. My understanding is another 10 milligrams a day and he’ll settle on Dolley Madison and start removing paintings from the walls (to save them from the terrorists). I’d move the originals to the Smithsonian and have the chief usher order some nice reproductions on Amazon. Always best to plan ahead.
December 9th, 2006 at 5:30 pmbush lacks the bravery of hitler and the intellect of goebbels, but, i would put him into the lot of fascists–perhaps a german historian could more properly place him along the fascist continuum…
j.s., i like the image of bush crawling on his belly at night with a flashlight in his teeth collecting the whitehouse artwork and hiding it from the tearists…
December 9th, 2006 at 6:18 pmNext he will be talking to pictures on the walls of the White House.
December 9th, 2006 at 6:22 pmI now live in Illinois but grew up in Kansas City, Mo., not too far from Truman’s place. I resent this chimp who is the worst thing to happen to this country trying to compare himself with the great Harry Truman. all I can say is : Chimpy, grow up!
December 9th, 2006 at 6:26 pmGWB: Why do I have to keep reminding the serfs who I am?
December 9th, 2006 at 6:34 pmahh, george is my muse!
December 9th, 2006 at 6:46 pmGWB: Why do I have to keep reminding the serfs who I am?
Comment by Zooey — December 9, 2006 @ 6:34 pm
GWB: Why do I have to keep reminding the serfs what I’m not?
December 9th, 2006 at 6:46 pmthis is off-topic, but, was lou dobbs frightened by a mexican family when he was child, or something??? perhaps he had a bad taco? bitten by a chihuahua? showed up at the wrong time at a donkey show? got caught naked on his bed on purpose by a maid in cancun? wow!!! he will not shut up about them!
December 9th, 2006 at 6:50 pmNo he won’t — it is topic number one with him. I like the guy too. But, enough is enough. I think he represents the angry old white men crowd with this stuff.
December 9th, 2006 at 6:57 pmBush, unlike Truman, supports action against Iran and wars for oil in the middle east.
Oil nationalization and 1953 coup
In the early 1950s, there was a political crisis centered in Iran that commanded the focused attention of British and American intelligence outfits. In 1951, the Iranian parliament, under the leadership of the nationalist movement of Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh, voted unanimously to nationalize the oil industry. This shut out the immensely profitable Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), which was a pillar of Britain’s economy and political clout. A month after that vote, Mossadegh was named Prime Minister of Iran.
In response to nationalization, Britain placed a massive embargo on Iranian oil exports, which only worsened the already fragile economy. Neither the AIOC nor Mossadegh was open to compromise in this period, with Britain insisting on a restoration of the AIOC and Mossadegh only willing to negotiate on the terms of its compensation for lost assets. The U.S. president at the time, Harry S. Truman, was categorically unwilling to join Britain in planning a coup against Mossadegh, and Britain felt unable to act without American cooperation, particularly since Mossadegh had shut down their embassy in 1952. Truman’s successor, Dwight Eisenhower, was finally persuaded by arguments that were anti-Communist rather than primarily economic, and focused on the potential for Iran’s Communist Tudeh Party to capitalize on political instability and assume power, aligning Iran and its immense oil resources with the Soviet bloc. Though Mossadegh never had a close political alliance with Tudeh, he also failed to act decisively against them in any way, which hardened U.S. policy against him. Coup plans which had stalled under Truman were immediately revived by an eager intelligence corps, with powerful aid from the brothers John Foster Dulles (Secretary of State) and Allen Welsh Dulles (CIA director), after Eisenhower’s inauguration in 1953.
December 9th, 2006 at 7:00 pmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi
wow! what a coincidence, Rco&wmm, i was just trying to find something about iran and the cia…looking through this on another tab:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html
anyway, i am trying to find the name of the cia-assissted iran secret service organization and the manual the cia with this group on torturing their enemies…i can’t recall; can you?
December 9th, 2006 at 7:04 pmoohhh, never mind, i found it: SAVAK i keep forgetting that one…
December 9th, 2006 at 7:08 pmhuh! i had thought zalmay khalilizad was more involved in SAVAK’s torture manual while being with the state department the first time through—before his ambassadorship to iraq, his position with RAND, being at Columbia, and his membership with pnac.
since bolton is leaving and khalilizad is coming in–he has the expertise with iran, after all–
things just go in circles with these war-criminals: negorponte-kissinger-daddybush-reagan-cia-savak-the shah-torture-bolton-pnac-khailiizad-baby bush-bolton-negroponte-kissinger
December 9th, 2006 at 7:21 pmThis guy is seriously deluded – perhaps even criminally deluded and certainly a sociopath and maybe even a psychopath.
December 9th, 2006 at 7:52 pmTruman? I’d say he’s more like Teddy Roosevelt myself.
December 9th, 2006 at 8:09 pmveritas,
i agree with you. it is probably a schizoid personality disorder; he clearly suffers from a delusional disorder.
the fact that he is comorbid with alchololism probably affects the quality of his medications…despite karl and condi and laura monitoring his meds.
December 9th, 2006 at 8:10 pmhe will not shut up about them!
Comment by e coli
Lou Dobbs Xenophobic Hour
December 9th, 2006 at 8:15 pmThe ONLY reason why Bushco brings up Truman is because the Boy Prince wants to drop a couple of nukes before he is wrenched from office by the boney hands of a Louisiana Prison Car full of demons.
Why should Democrats have all the fun?
December 9th, 2006 at 8:18 pmBush, Durbin said, “reacted very strongly. He got very animated in his response†and emphasized that he is “the commander in chief.â€
They, Durbin and others, are trying to tell us he’s a nut-case. (and I completely agree.) This is about as close as someone in Dubin’s position can get to coming right out and saying it.
December 9th, 2006 at 8:20 pm“There appears to as yet be no political will to extract our military from Iraq. The nasty little truth is that this is just fine with the Democrats, –RealityCheck
That’s a slander. The idea that Congressional Democrats will play politics with deployed troops is COMPLETELY countered by the fact that they have voted for all funding bills, in spite of howls of protest from many in the party.
The ‘lack of political will’ has to do with a lack of humane solutions to a coup and its illegal war.
December 9th, 2006 at 8:25 pmHistory does tend to be repetitive, but this time I think the outcome will be fundamentally different. Iran has built up a very impressive defense umbrella and I have no doubt this is why the Zionist drums for war have been ignored for so long. The latest exercises this summer indicated to all but the most suicidal maniacs that Iran is not to be trifled with any more. As a casual student of weaponry I am most impressed with the Sunburn and Onyx missiles obtained from Russia. More powerful than anything in the current US arsenal, they can crack one of our carriers in two with a single strike, and the US defense systems are utterly useless. So, this little banty rooster can rattle sabers and whine that he can’t talk with Iran and Syria, but in the meantime the Iranians have already moved to form a new Middle East Security Alliance. With that, it won’t matter what our little chickenshit thinks anyway. I say, you go Ahmadinejad, and get it done — the world will be no worse for your efforts.
December 9th, 2006 at 8:29 pmAnd zoology, does Zooey give you that much wood?
December 9th, 2006 at 8:33 pmstone,
great post! i agree with you completely—
December 9th, 2006 at 8:42 pmOT – But Discovery is in orbit. I love night launches! The sky flast is spectacular down here in Florida.
December 9th, 2006 at 8:58 pme coli, which post — iran or zoology and his woody?
December 9th, 2006 at 9:03 pmiran!
[i don't feed the IRI/vinnie/zoo ant the other trolls]
December 9th, 2006 at 9:15 pmAnd zoology, does Zooey give you that much wood?
Comment by stonehinge
I appreciate it, but please don’t….ok?
December 9th, 2006 at 9:30 pmnp
December 9th, 2006 at 9:37 pmThanks. :)
December 9th, 2006 at 9:44 pmAnd blalock:
December 9th, 2006 at 10:18 pmas much honorable it seems to be to post something you have worked on for at least a year,
shorter comments give others a chance to participate. This is not your personal blog. So keep it short, nobody wants to grow grey hair reading it.
Dixie Chicken:
You seem to think you’re not in the minority. You lost. We might let you out of the basement occasionally, if you’d quit drooling.
December 9th, 2006 at 10:54 pmYeah, Blalock, now we see precisely who you are. You know, I was actually considering writing a detailed response to that worthless screed. But, since it is genuinely worthless, and since this is not about honest differences as you claim, but about the lying and thieving radicals that you so lovingly justify and embrace, don’t consider for one moment that we would ever include you in any conceivable definition of bi-partisan debate, for you have already excluded yourself.
December 9th, 2006 at 11:09 pmBlalock,
I agree it would be swell if we lived in a world where honest disagreements could be civilly debated. Sadly we live in a world where conservatives have declared war on liberals and practiced nothing but slash-and-burn, take-no-prisoners tactics for the past 25 years. You don’t show up for a knife fight with a guitar, dude. It’s a little late for “can’t we all just get along.”
So do us all a favor – post your long-winded, skeevy diatribes elsewhere and wake the f*ck up.
December 9th, 2006 at 11:22 pmQuartermaster, how does your expression of homophobia fit with the topic? And furthermore, given that homosexuality is scarcely a factor in the African AID crisis, perhaps you should ask your psychiatrist to adjust your medication.
But putting all that aside, the threat of AIDS transmission via mosquito vectors has been deliberately ignored by your neo-Liberal financial masters for the last umpteen years. So, instead of frothing with all this hatred, why don’t you start demanding some investment in research to stem the tide? With one or two of the billions spent on Iraq, we might have brought this situation under control long before the mosquitoes became a significant threat.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:12 amSorry if this has been addressed.
This is not the first time. Ever notice how easily Republican presidents compare or align themselves with Democratic presidents FDR and Truman?
December 10th, 2006 at 12:13 amQuartermaster, that’s about what I expected from you. Go take your insipid drek over to LGF as you will get no respect here I assure you. Perhaps if you do have AIDS in your family you will find a reason to humble yourself. Life is short, chowder-head. You might want to take stock of your situation over the long haul.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:59 amWC, that’s really an excellent point, and I think it deserves more attention. The reality is that the Republican party, as it is currently constituted, is an entirely modern institution. Consequently, they don’t have any admirable presidential models of their own. And since they operate as the radicals in our political-economic system, and since their motivations are entirely self-serving, it would be unlikely that they could ever produce such an entity.
From another viewpoint, this is all part of the Orwellian Newspeak where the conservatives provide the destructive force and the progressives are those who seek to preserve traditional American values. Because of this destructive twisting of the language, and the consequent loss of vision, there are no genuine liberals left in the American political-economic system. Without liberals, there is very little pressure for any advancement of our social condition, and without that, there will be no great presidencies in our future.
It’s not a very encouraging picture at this point in time, as we have already lost a great deal. Thankfully, we can look to the brilliant political victories in South America and the enormous courage displayed by the Iranians and the Lebanese for inspiration. And there are viable economic alternatives which we can consider, but that is a topic for another time.
December 10th, 2006 at 1:00 amQuite clear that Blalock is Closet Gay, and not-so-closet Racist.
‘Conservative’ is, as you note, a misnomer.
Since GFH Bush put Hussein’s nuclear bomb plans on the Internet, shattered the seals on Hussein’s high-explosives, NK’s plutonium, and now is selling nuke technology to India, it is quite clear who is trying to CONSERVE the nuclear club to the current players.
Bushco wants more customers, one nuke sale after the next. Giving WMD to our enemies is just one of his treasons.
And Blalock (and the rest of his aliases) are on-board with the treason. That’s why they hate Americans so much — because America is too damn good for them, and they suspect, correctly, that they are in fact the enemy.
December 10th, 2006 at 1:45 amGood point, Paul. Regarding the concentration of gays within the political parties, it’s pretty clear that it is the Republicans who have the highest concentration of gay members who hold political office. Oddly enough, if you are looking to “out” gay people, just look around for those who are bashing gays the most. Some say that even St. Paul was guilty of this, and it may well be the truth. He certainly had a strong dislike for women.
December 10th, 2006 at 2:12 amDubya once again demonstrates his command of history, foreign policy and leadership. When your legitimacy as a leader is based on reiterating that you are commander-in-chief, its time to leave.
December 10th, 2006 at 8:05 amBush’s argument seems to be that a lot of great presidents were not thought as such during their times. I would like to counter that with a lot of bad presidents were.
December 10th, 2006 at 9:12 amWhat we need right now is a President, not a Commander-in-Chief.
I don’t think you heard Harry Truman running around declaring “I am the Commarnder-in-Chief” (except when he fired Gen. Douglas MacCarthur for defying a direct order).
This exchange just shows how out of touch Bush is. His actions are just shouting for impeachment. The election that sent a clear message to change course in Iraq has been met with a digging in of the heals for stay the course. Something will give.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:37 amHere is the difference between Truman and Bush, fighting similar wars. The Cold War was predicated on an idealogical struggle. That was always the context in which the U.S. fought it. Thus, it knew over time it would win because it had created a system everyone in the world wanted to buy into (market economy, political and religious freedoms, etc.). It was only a matter of time before communism failed. Bush’s war is different in that it is built on upon making money for political cronies at Halliburton, oil companies, and other contractors. With the motive being profit over freedom, it also is bound to lose. By the way, Truman actively discouraged and fought against war profiteering as a Senator (with his war commission) and as president. Bush, on the other hand, actually welcomes it, giving away no-bid contracts to Cheney’s friends.
Without an ideaological base on which to fight, Bush’s war was doomed from the beginning. No one can sustain a war in this context. Bush will be remembered more as an LBJ than a Truman, and that is sad.
December 10th, 2006 at 4:37 pm“I’m the commander in chief.”
We can take care of that for you.
December 10th, 2006 at 8:14 pm“Some say that even St. Paul was guilty of this, and it may well be the truth. He certainly had a strong dislike for women.”–stonehinge
‘Saint’ Saul, whose entire Goyim church violated Jesus’ instructions:
“These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.” (Matthew 10)
December 10th, 2006 at 9:25 pmAs a resident of the state of Missouri, and specifically of Jackson County, home of Harry S Truman, I just have to say that any comparrisons between this aWol little prick and Give ‘em Hell Harry is a complete and utter apostacy.
December 10th, 2006 at 11:14 pmYa’ll don’t get it. See? We are the stupid consumers. Our father(bush), says we are stupid, mindless, and he has to pound it into our heads what he himself thinks we want to hear. We have no brain, we are just consumers. Say it many times, and we’ll eventually believe it, because we are stupid. Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld and Rice all know it’s a lost cause, but if they keep saying the positive, stupid us will believe it, because we’re all stupid, and bush is the saviour of the stupid. everyone in this world is stupid, but the people half way around the world are lintbags and don’t deserve to live, to bush’s mind. Bush will push the button to rid all stupid people and the really ‘intelligent’ ones will go down to their bunkers. Stupid, bush. I spit on you.
December 23rd, 2006 at 2:17 pm