posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 11:29 AM
Two thoughts...
On Wednesday, BillO was incensed that his portfolio had lost (according to him) "Millions" over the past year. He's a reactionary, lashing out at
anything he percieves to be an appropriate target for his diatribe. Bush fits the description in his mind currently, so he reacted. No stock is put
in it when he lashes out against a Nancy Pelosi, an illegal immigrant, or a ghetto rapper... so why put any stock in him lashing out against Bush? (I
already know the answer, so it was a hypothetical question... that answer being "Because him targetting Bush suits our personal agenda, we'll now
talk about O'Reilly as if his opinion has some merit... at least until he redirects his verbal manifestos against someone we agree with, then he's
an idiot again.")
2nd thought: Bill's right on the money on one issue. Bush DID select the wrong people to place in positions of power around him. Personally, I do
not consider GWB to be one of the worst presidents, generally speaking, in history. I do, however, consider him to be one of the worst delegators of
authority ever to sit in the Oval Office. The man chose the worst policy advisors, the worst cabinet members, and the most personal agenda driven
Washington bureaucrats of any president in recent history... and he trusted his choices to the degree that he actually listened to what they said and
used their bad advice to help him set policy. This was one of Ronald Reagans strong points which frequently gets overlooked... the man was called
"The Great Communicator" and rightfully so, but he also could have been called the "Great Delegator" because not only did he select a brilliant
ballance of agressive consultants and more patient consultants, he also used common sense & a wider view of the overall picture when considering any
of their advice. It seems at time like Bush has placed far too much trust in his advisors and not enough trust in hims own thoughts on various
issues. (Which is why, sad as I am to admit it, there's a lot of truth to saying GWB lacks political curiosity. He listens to possible solutions
only until he hears one that sounds approppriate and then picks that solution without hearing the alternatives or considering the further reaching
ramifications of his advisor's recomendations. Not a good practice for the leader of the free world.)