Subscribe via RSS Feed

And The Worst Moment of His Presidency Was…

[ 119 ] November 3, 2010 |

The former President in a forthcoming interview (emphasis mine):

MATT LAUER: You say you told Laura at the time it was the worst moment of your presidency?

GEORGE W. BUSH: Yes. My record was strong, I felt, when it came to race relations and giving people a chance. And it was a disgusting moment.

You might suppose he’s talking about Hurricane Katrina, and if you did, you’d only be half-wrong.  Because the “worst moment of [his] presidency,” according to the man himself, was this:

According to the man himself, then, Bush placed more importance on whether people perceived him to be racist than what happened to actual black people in the city of New Orleans.

In short, he proved Kanye right.

UPDATE: In the comments, nitpicker asks: “Um…9/11?”  I wish Lauer had had the nerve to ask the same.

Hey, one stop shop for shearling bomber jacket in the cyber word where you can buy not only western leather jackets but also boys bomber jacket. In addition to that shop here women’s motorcycle apparel and vintage leather motorcycle jackets as well.

Comments (119)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Oscar Leroy says:

    By far the best thing about that video is the look of sheer white-knuckled horror on Mike Myers’s face. “Oh no, I’m standing next to an angry black man! How will I sell Shrek boxer shorts if people associate me with him?”

    • SEK says:

      I’m actually surprised, watching that years later, that West caught such hell for it. The man is obviously emotional, raging with anger, choking back tears, etc. It’s not as if he calmly made a political statement from some safe distance (emotionally or otherwise); he said something he truly believed, which Bush has now proven him to be correct about, and he did so in the heat of the moment.

      • DocAmazing says:

        Why are you surprised? Black celebrities have always been expected to soft-pedal their political comments, unless they’re siding with the Bill Cosby School of Pull Your Flarn-Flarn Pants Up Black Male Pathology.

        You can get your Olympic medals taken for being too up-front.

      • Malaclypse says:

        The man is obviously emotional, raging with anger

        So, in other words, precisely the scariest kind of scary black man (see Jeremiah Wright). As Doc correctly points out, black men are only allowed to get angry with other black men.

    • Jon H says:

      The thought of following the “Yes, and…” rule of improv was probably why he reacted that way:

      Trained to go along with whatever comes up, but knowing that to go along with it could be his doom.

    • McKingford says:

      Although I realize that a lot of people have made this point before, when you look at the video Myers is remarkable for his total poker face…except at the end with Kanye’s “George Bush doesn’t care about black people” quip where he’s like “right – WHAT?” in a Seinfeldian voice.

    • joe from Lowell says:

      “Oh, Jesus, I’m a Canadian! They’re gonna deport me!”

  2. Malaclypse says:

    Well, maybe Bush believed his mommy when she said black people were better off after Katrina. (Note the bonus racism of the prospect of more black people in Texas being scary).

  3. nitpicker says:

    Um…9/11?

  4. Jon H says:

    Approving torture? Especially of people who turn out innocent?

    • NonyNony says:

      What does that have to do with him?

      It’s all about him. The reason that this was the worst thing about his presidency is that it hurt his feelings.

      That’s also why 9/11 is not an appropriate answer. 9/11 was a huge opportunity for him – guaranteed he’d be a two-term president, let him get his War on, let him put on that flight suit and pretend like he was a soldier. All sorts of ego stroking crap. West calling him out for being a monster made him feel bad. Clearly that was the worst thing that he had to go through.

      I’m slightly surprised it wasn’t the shoe-thrower, but then he never really seemed to care what the Iraqis thought about him anyway.

      • JoshA says:

        “Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open sewer and die.” Mel Brooks

        Bush expresses a similar sentiment, except he isn’t meaning it as a joke—something like “Thousands of people dying is a non-event. Being subject to public criticism because of it is horrifyingly awful.”

        • NonyNony says:

          It’s somewhat worse than you’re even giving him credit for, because I don’t think he quite understands that his decisions led to thousands of people dying or that their blood is on his hands (as it is on every President and world leader – I don’t know how most of them sleep nights). It never enters his thoughts to think about those folks. So it’s more like “Public criticism is horribly awful” – the dead people don’t even enter his equation as a counterbalance.

          • SEK says:

            So it’s more like “Public criticism is horribly awful” – the dead people don’t even enter his equation as a counterbalance.

            In his defense, they’re beyond reproaching him. Why should he care what they think?

            • rumor says:

              We’re getting fairly close to a “banality of evil” argument here.

              Does that count as a Godwin’s Law trigger? I hope not. It’s a valid claim for Bush, based on his own words.

  5. cer says:

    For that matter he doesn’t even say that watching helplessly as an historic city was destroyed and while American citizens died or had their lives destroyed was his worst moment. No, when a musician criticized him that hurt his feelings and that was totally worse than a disaster that could have been averted or minimized. Yup.

  6. whetstone says:

    I tend to think Killer Mike was more correct than Kanye:

    “Comment Kanye made was damn near right / Bush hates poor people, be they black or white.” –from “That’s Life,” which is an excellent song.

    • snuh says:

      kanye did an interview with ABC once where he basically conceded that killer mike was right:

      Moran: “Do you think it was fair? In the heat of the moment it came out. Reflecting now, do you still believe George Bush doesn’t care about black people?”

      West: “I mean, I have a hard time believing that George Bush cares about anyone. So side bar, black people also, you know?”

  7. Jay B. says:

    Giving people a chance? To do what? Drown?

    Miss him yet?

  8. Bob says:

    He destroyed the economy.
    He ignored clear warnings before 9/11.
    He started two needless wars we are still bogged down in.
    He approved the use of torture.
    He did nothing during Katrina.
    Heckuva job Bushie.

  9. McKingford says:

    I remember at the time thinking Kanye was relatively brave for putting his neck out like that (although as above commenters have noted, it seems like an impassioned spur of the moment comment).

    But learning now that it hurt GWBush’s feelings so much that it was the low point of his presidency makes me appreciate Kanye that much more for it.

  10. ralphdibny says:

    Remember back when there were all these slurs against minorities, but there were no words even remotely comparable that could be said to white people? Well, apparently now there is a word that is viler than any ethnic slur, a word that packs more punch than a terrorist attack, or a raging hurricane. “Racist.”

  11. harmfulguy says:

    I’ve always thought Kanye’s comments were unfair. I’m sure Dubya has every bit as much compassion for black billionaires as he does for white billionaires.

    Beside that, everybody on the right knows that being called racist is a kajillion times worse than being harmed by someone else’s racism (which never happens anyway).

  12. wengler says:

    George W. Bush. The 64 year-old man and two-term President still trapped in the mindset of an unrepentant toddler combined with an egocentric teenager. And still being coddled by the rightwing corporate media.

    Boo fucking hoo.

    • Malaclypse says:

      George W. Bush. The 64 year-old man and two-term President still trapped in the mindset of an unrepentant toddler combined with an egocentric teenager.

      And, for eight years, the man in charge of the most powerful military the world as ever seen.

      Christ, fucking Nixon was saner.

  13. Fritz says:

    What would a principled, non-racist have done differently, SEK? What would a principled, non-racist, who is doing their best in a bad situation, have felt when, for all that, they’re accused of being the worst thing you can be in contemporary American politics?

    I would have found it gutting.

    FWIW, In Southern California they tell us that after The Big One, we should be prepared to wait and survive on our own for three days before we can begin to think about the Federal response.

    • Malaclypse says:

      In Southern California they tell us that after The Big One

      Something tells me that “they” is talk radio and/or Glenn Beck, rather than someone who would, you know, know things.

      Either way, I’m sure tax cuts will improve response time.

      • Fritz says:

        Dude, it was Matthew Bettenhausen, Secretary of the California Emergency Management Agency

        • Malaclypse says:

          Advice to keep food on hand does not equal “the feds are gonna let us all die”.

          Dude.

          • elm says:

            Yeah, this is an egregious misread. Keep 3 days of food on hand means, “It may take 3 days before we get to you with food and water. Be prepared for that.”

            It does not mean, to quote Fritz, “we should be prepared to wait and survive on our own for three days before we can begin to think about the Federal response.”

            If Fritz needs it spelled out: 1. his phrasing suggests it will be more than 3 days, because you’ll only start thinking about the feds on day 4; 2. his reading assumes that providing food and water is the only thing the feds do instead of realizing that SAR and medical treatment will come first; 3. telling everyone to have 3 days food and water means that they expect to get fresh food and water to everyone by day 4, but that means, since this isn’t an instantaneous process, they’ll start getting that to some people even earlier.

            I’m pretty sure I could go on, but since Fritz only selectively responds to criticisms, and I doubt he’ll respond to this one, I think I’ll stop there.

        • Barack Obama doesn’t care about white people.

          And I have a tape to prove that Michelle doesn’t either! Hold on while I look for it in my backpack.

        • L2P says:

          Fritz, they said nothing of the sort. If they thought the Feds would take 3 days to actually help, they’d recommend keeping at least 7 days of food. Because, you know, its PREPARATION, as in you want to be PREPARED FOR THE WORST. If you have 3 days of food, you’ll have plenty for a day, or two, and for any stray people who don’t have squat.

          As someone who actually works in law enforcement, and on the emergency response team, we expect a response within hours, and full response in a day. Jesus Christ, SD Nav Station is 10 hours away by sea – unless all of Baja falls into the sea, we’re not looking at 3 days.

          • Fritz says:

            Bettenhausen urged families to make sure they have enough food and water to last three days after a quake.

            We’re going to be overwhelmed. We need individuals to be more prepared,” he said.

            • Malaclypse says:

              Yes Fritz, we all read that. If you think that means “OMG the feds are gonna stand by and let everyone die!!111!” then that says more about you than about the feds.

              They have meds, now, Fritz. You might want to check meds out.

              And again, if you want faster response times, well, taxes pay for stuff like that. We got the levees that the Bush tax policies paid for.

            • Sophist says:

              Yes, they are going to overwhelmed if they have to feed everyone as well as dig everyone out of the rubble. So they are asking people to have some provisions on hand specifically so that they will not be overwhelmed. How is this hard to grasp?

    • Malaclypse says:

      Oh, and a competent non-racist would have 1) not dismantled FEMA, and 2) never, ever have praised “heckovajob” Brownie on his job performance. A compentent leader would have, you know, held someone accountable for the dozens of bad, bad decisions that led to the deaths of real people. And they would not whine.

    • Jay B. says:

      The difference between a Hurricane and an Earthquake. Discuss.

      A principled person — scratch that, a barely competent person, upon looking a map and seeing the GIGANTIC STORM COMING RIGHT AT NEW ORLEANS — would make evacuation plans, arrangements or announcements in advance of the fucking storm. Figuring that the federal disaster response has immeasurably more resources than local or state disaster agencies, the Feds could have spearheaded the effort.

      That’s at the crisis level.

      At the reactive level, one might, you know, cut short a birthday party in order to look concerned about it. Maybe even really BE concerned about it. He clearly, to this day, doesn’t give a shit.

      He failed on every conceivable level to the point where I could give a shit about the “morality in his heart” — his actions were ineffectual, his appointed team criminally inept and his leadership a massive joke.

      Now let me know if you’ve figured out the difference between a hurricane and an earthquake. HINT: One doesn’t show up on radar for a week and a half.

    • SEK says:

      What would a principled, non-racist have done differently, SEK? What would a principled, non-racist, who is doing their best in a bad situation, have felt when, for all that, they’re accused of being the worst thing you can be in contemporary American politics?

      For one, they would’ve acted with sufficient seriousness and not let the Mounties beat them to St. Bernard Parish. To this day, that story sums up my feelings about the federal response to Katrina: the Bush response was so incompetent that Canadians beat Americans to a city about as distant from Canada as they come. In other words, I don’t think the Bush administration was “doing their best in a bad situation” so much as “ignoring the problem, whining when it was brought to their attention, and then complaining when they were blamed for the 1,800 deaths that were caused, in no small part, by an ideological commitment to ‘smaller government,’ which seemingly only entails putting horse-traders in charge of disaster relief.” That is not making the best of a bad situation: it’s forcing other people to reap what you’ve sown with their lives.

      But all of that, believe it or not, is beside the point, which is that despite all that happened on his watch, our former president is so self-involved that the worst moment was when a rapper called him a name.

      • Fritz says:

        What do you mean, sufficient seriousness? Maybe you didn’t read to the end of the story.

        But it’s a far different scene from those first five days after the storm, when — as law enforcement and rescue workers concentrated on New Orleans – three babies were born in St. Bernard, the jail was converted to a triage center, and hospital patients were hoisted in sheets out of windows to boats below.

        Could a non-racist have made the same mistake?

        • DocAmazing says:

          No.

          This has been…

        • SEK says:

          Maybe you didn’t read to the end of the story.

          I did, but my knowledge of the aftermath of Katrina isn’t entirely based on a single article, so I’m well aware of who was where and when.

          That said, what does any of this have to do with Bush’s statement that being called a name was the worst moment of his presidency … worse than the deaths of 1,800 American citizens on American soil, or 3,000 American citizens on American soil? Are you really going to defend that degree of narcissism? And if not, are you going to contend that it developed only after he left office, despite the fact that he acknowledged that he thought it while he was still in? And if you concede that it was operative when he was in office, will you acknowledge that it speaks to a person more concerned with his legacy than the welfare of the people he’s been elected to lead?

          • Fritz says:

            First, from the quoted text, taken in context, it doesn’t seem to me that he did in fact say that being called a racist was the worst moment of his presidency.

            Second, the question of narcissism. Let’s assume for a moment that the premise of your argument is correct. I’m still not sure what you mean by narcissism. This may be a question of vocabulary. What is Bush narcissistic regarding? You write, “it speaks to a person more concerned with his legacy than the welfare of the people he’s been elected to lead”. These should be the same thing, I think. His legacy is their welfare.

            You can see this in the fuller context. The article says,

            “He called me a racist,” Bush tells Lauer. “And I didn’t appreciate it then. I don’t appreciate it now. It’s one thing to say, ‘I don’t appreciate the way he’s handled his business.’ It’s another thing to say, ‘This man’s a racist.’ I resent it, it’s not true.”

            The legacy of having botched the response to Katrina, of those people having died, is bad enough. Bush says at much. To then be accused of having done so because of racism, or a racist lack of compassion, makes it worse.

            Also, I have to quibble with the question that there is something wrong with narcissism in our president. This probably won’t mean anything to you, but I don’t believe that Bush would even rank among the top five most narcissistic. Wilson? Nixon? Clinton? Jefferson?

            Another way to come at this question is to consider the proper place of narcissism, or as I think it should be called, ambition. In Federalist #1, Publius identifies the passions that are most dangerous to a republican form of government. These include “ambition, avarice, personal animosity, party opposition, and many other motives, not more laudable than these”. I see your argument for narcissism as closely connected to ambition. It’s selfish and it regards the good of the self above the responsibility to service, truth, or justice.

            In Federalist #51, Publius has the wrestle with the problem of parchment barriers. The concern is how to make government powerful enough to control the governed while also maintaining its proper limits. Publius’s solution is to turn to something low and solid: ambition, a self-regarding desire for power and renown. Publius write, “The interest of the man must be connected to the constitutional rights of the place.” If we followed it through, and a blog comment section is no place to do that, Publius would argue that of course the President is ambitious and concerned about his legacy, that’s how we guarantee his responsibility given his enormous grant of power. I see this as an answer to Lincoln’s question from his Lyceeum Address, “Is it unreasonable then to expect, that some man possessed of the loftiest genius, coupled with ambition sufficient to push it to its utmost stretch, will at some time, spring up among us?”

            Ambition is natural, it is expected, and, to a certain extent it is a necessary part of our government’s structure. So, I reject your premise.

            • DocAmazing says:

              Reject away; you’re still FOS. To be more crestfallen because someone had something bad to say about you than because thousands died on your watch–preventably, in all likelihood–is almost the definition of narcissism, all of your tissue-thin pantomime about “ambition” aside.

        • wengler says:

          Would it make you feel better if I said I think Bush would’ve cared a lot more about black people had they voted Republican?

    • I would have found it gutting.

      HEY YOU RACIST.

      Look! That was worse than 9/11! Please don’t waterboard me/shoot me/rocket my wedding/invade my country.

    • Socraticsilence says:

      You know what would suck even more than being called a racist when you were trying you’re best- reading a kids book and then being informed that the single most deadly attack in the history of the US occured on your watch and that you ignored the signs of it to go hang out on your dude ranch.

  14. Fritz says:

    I’m not sure I can articulate it, but there is something foul about looking back in cold blood and accusing a president of not providing all the appropriate help in a disaster because he’s a racist.

    • Jay B. says:

      OK, he didn’t provide all the appropriate help because he was a SHITTY PRESIDENT. Who the fuck cares? He was a clod. Massively inept. A war criminal to boot. In a better world he’d be in jail for the rest of his world-destroying life.

      Republicans get upset about literally the dumbest fucking things imaginable.

    • Malaclypse says:

      Oh, it was not just that he was racist. Really, I think the woeful incompetence outweights racism as an explanatory factor. After all, we are talking about someone who fucked up everything he touched for eight years.

      Now his mom, however, was just plain flat out racist.

      “What I’m hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas,” Barbara Bush said in an interview on Monday with the radio program “Marketplace.”

    • Jay B. says:

      I’m not sure I can articulate it, but there is some thing laughably immoral about caring more about a President’s feelings than about his lack of action and catastrophic mismanagment.

      Oh wait. It seems I can articulate it. Authoritarian bootlickers don’t care about people’s lives, only their rulers’.

    • DrDick says:

      How about he sat on his thumbs because he is a bloody sociopath who simply does not give a damn about anyone except himself? I honestly am not sure that Dubya actually is a racist (though his moma certainly is), I think the evidence is that he does not give a shit about anyone other than himself.

      • jazzbumpa says:

        I have to believe he’s quite fond of all his daddy’s rich friends, who bailed him out when everything else he did in his essentially worthless life turned to shit.

        Also, I don’t think W is racist – elitist, yes. Racist, no.

        JzB

      • Anonymous says:

        This is right; especially compared to the leading lights of the GOP in 2010, Bush seems (emphasis on *seems*, as none of us know what’s in his heart) rather less racist (in the sense of harboring specific racial animosity) than the average Republican. However, the contention that he simply doesn’t care about black people is quite different, and it seems pretty hard to argue with based on his record.

    • LoriK says:

      Not remotely as foul as that president looking back in cold blood at the carnage and disaster that was his presidency and saying that the worst moment of the whole godawful mess was Kayne calling him a racist.

      It doesn’t matter if it was true or not. What matters is that no one who isn’t a soulless moral idiot would say that a false accusation of racism was worse than 9/11 or Katrina itself or Abu Ghraib or one of any number of other horrors visited on the country during Bush’s presidency.

    • Socraticsilence says:

      Um Kanye wasn’t exactly “looking back in cold blood” he’d just witnessed an American city drown while president played guitar.

    • Larkspur says:

      “…there is something foul about looking back in cold blood….”

      Good lord. What does this even mean?

    • Bobby Thomson says:

      I’m not sure I can articulate it, but there is something foul about looking back in cold blood and accusing a president of not providing all the appropriate help in a disaster because he’s a racist.

      I can articulate that there is something beyond foul about not providing all the appropriate help in a disaster because you are a “small government (pay no attention to the military industrial complex behind the curtain and the huge subsidies paid to multinational corporations)” sociopath, racist or no.

      Sorry his fee fees were hurt. Actually, I’m not. I’m sorry he didn’t get the same treatment as the defendants at Nuremberg for his war crimes.

  15. djw says:

    Since we’re on the subject, I must share this photo of my friend Greg, of whom I’m exceedingly jealous. It wasn’t easy to set this up.

  16. DrDick says:

    9/11 gave him wood, as well as an excuse to play hero and invade Iraq. Probably the best day of his administration for him.

  17. Malaclypse says:

    You know, I must admit to never noticing that Fritz is an adjunct in Donalde’s department at Long Beach. Was everybody except me aware of this internet tradition?

    • Warren Terra says:

      No Cerritos, we weren’t!

      (Anyone who’s heard enough car dealership ads in the LA area will likely be heartily sick of the line I’m adapting)

    • SEK says:

      It’s not Fritz’s fault that LBCC made a mistake. You can’t hold The Donalde against him, for The Donalde is sui generis.

      • SEK says:

        (Also, no making fun of adjuncts. We are a brave and noble lot, we are.)

        • Malaclypse says:

          As an adjunct in an earlier career, I would not make fun of adjuncts. In fact, I think it obvious that Fritz is smarter than Donalde, and it boggles the mind that an institution that would grant Donalde tenure would keep Fritz at the adjunct level.

          I’m just boggles that we have two LBCC poly sci trolls. I had heard there were no conservative academics…

  18. Fritz says:

    I’mma let you finish.

    Why does SEK disregard this follow up? Isn’t this context important? Bush is challenged on this point and responds:

    Lauer: “Well, here’s the reason. You’re not saying that the worst moment in your presidency was watching the misery in Louisiana. You’re saying it was when someone insulted you because of that.”

    Bush: “No, and I also make it clear that the misery in Louisiana affected me deeply as well. There’s a lot of tough moments in the book. And it was a disgusting moment, pure and simple.”

    • Dave3544 says:

      This does not help you. Katrina affected Bush “deeply.” What affected him even more – at the time, when he was writing the book, and to this very day – is that a rapper said on tv that Bush doesn’t care about black people.

      Unless you are willing to say that, “yes, the worse part of Katrina was that Kanye implied that Bush was a racist,” then you should stop.

      • hv says:

        This.

        For goodness’ sake, no one is willing to defend Bush on Katrina but it blows my mind about how many people are kinda willing to defend Bush on Katrina — but just a little.

        I suspect it is to avoid the damning fact that Katrina is a perfect example of why the progressive philosophy is superior to the status quo; where intelligent people preparing for likely disasters might be expected to outperform libertarians, et al.

        Please, be charitable enough to at least admit the few obvious times when the opposing ideals might hold merit.

    • DocAmazing says:

      “As well”. The devastation bothered Li’l George “as well”.

      His generosity, empathy and concern are touching.

      That’s the best you could find, and you wasted your “I’mma let you finish” gag on it?

    • hv says:

      Fritz, I am trying to follow you but I have no idea what it means when GWB says “No, and…”

      I understand “Yes, and…”

      I understand “No, but…”

      But I don’t get “No, and…”

      ========

      I really hope I don’t have to read the damn book.

      • ajay says:

        I’d interpret it as him agreeing with two statements at once, in a slightly haphazard way.

        Try reading it as:

        Lauer: Well, here’s the reason. You’re not saying that the worst moment in your presidency was watching the misery in Louisiana.

        Bush: No. [ie, no, I'm not saying that]

        Lauer: You’re saying it was when someone insulted you because of that.

        Bush: It was a disgusting moment, pure and simple.
        I also make it clear that the misery in Louisiana affected me deeply as well. There’s a lot of tough moments in the book.

      • Jeremy says:

        Wow, I thought W might have been saying, “No (as in he didn’t think the comment was worse than the misery), and…(something)”

        But then I looked at what Lauer was saying, and basically W is agreeing with Lauer’s initial sentence, that the misery wasn’t worse than him being called a racist.

        Of course, given W’s (lack of) grammatical prowess, it’s hard to call him on that.

    • Anderson says:

      Why do y’all waste your time with Fritz?

      • elm says:

        If I had better googling skills I’d link here to the cartoon about someone “being wrong on the internet.” It’s like catnip: we can’t resist.

      • Fritz says:

        They’ve read On Liberty?

        though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.

        • hv says:

          So you’re admitting you’re in error, it’s just your errors are instructive and community-serving?!

          I encourage you to entertain the possibility that some of your opinions might be 100% wrong, sometimes. I know mine often are. You can’t really believe that each and every time you make an error there is automatically some useful kernel of truth in there. It’s a lot harder to be usefully wrong than you imagine.

          • Fritz says:

            So you’re admitting you’re in error, it’s just your errors are instructive and community-serving?!

            I’m pointing out two things. First, it’s wrong to assume infalibility. People here don’t have access to legal sanctions, obviously, but they do call names, etc…, which I’ve always taken to be a milder form of the same instinct. I was called a “troll”, which means not seriously worthy of consideration, because I disagreed and not any other behavior.

            Second, I’m saying that your errors are instructive and serve me, even when they’re 100% wrong.

    • Fritz says:

      Bush is rejecting the premise of the question.

      Lauer: You’re saying it was when someone insulted you because of that.

      Bush: No (I’m not saying being called a racist is worst moment of my presidency), and I also make it clear that the misery in Louisiana affected me deeply as well.

    • Jeffrey Kramer says:

      When you say something that sounds sociopathic on its face, and a helpful interviewer comes around later and says “Hey, what you said sounds sociopathic on its face, are you really implying what it seems you’re implying?”, you do NOT get make-up credit for saying “Oh horrors, no, of course I didn’t mean to imply the sociopathic part, I’m a good decent man after all who cares about human life. As well.”

  19. ckc (not kc) says:

    There’s a lot of tough moments in the book.

    …the tough moment wasn’t in any book, Georgie

  20. mark f says:

    What about when he fell off a Segway in his parents’ driveway?

  21. Bill Murray says:

    and the assaulting pretzel. Mad skillzzzz

  22. [...] was far from the only one who found this amusing. SEK at Lawyers, Guns, and Money says: According to the man himself, then, Bush placed more importance on whether people perceived him [...]

  23. Someone essentially lend a hand to make critically articles I’d state. That is the first time I frequented your website page and so far? I amazed with the analysis you made to make this actual post extraordinary. Excellent process!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • Switch to our mobile site