I must say, I like Donald Rumsfeld - along with Colin Powell, was one of a few voices in the George W. Whitehouse with any reality.
I'm only a few chapters into Mr. Rumsfeld's book. His defence of Reagan was classic: Reagan was characterized as a bit of an idiot, but had a nice manner and as an actor could protray a president well in public. Rumsfeld did defend his president, vaguely pointed to the press as always portraying Republican presidents as dunces (I can understand his position if he worked for Reagan and followed up with George W. - not sure if he worked for George Sr. who I wouldn't classify as an idiot). However, he provided a nice punch-line with "Now, Reagan wasn't a detail oriented manager.....".
I also find his opening chapter on known facts, unknown facts and the unknown unknown to be startling. Not that the concept is even remotely complicated, but that for a party that portrays everything in stark black and white, that they really do have trouble when the world that doesn't fit into their viewpoint - I had hoped that the black-and-white speeches were only the simplest way to make points and make themselves the good guys and the opponents the evil guys, but I suspect they actually believe this.
When it comes to the real world, of course there are "unknown unknowns", a.k.a. "surprises". In the real world, there is a greater than 0% chance that Queen Elizabeth has a nuclear missile aimed at the White House, or that Canada is trying to take over the U.S., or that Cuba is somehow a threat to the U.S. and the continued embargo is somehow warranted. This is what makes the posturing of the Bush Jr. White House so problematic - particularly the post-Obama Cheney - he actually said that the policies of the Bush Jr. period made the U.S. safer and that any future attack would be proof of this thesis. Think about this for a moment - he's actually hoping for an attack to justify the brinkmanship of the administration he was so influential in...and these are the guys who were in charge when 911 happened - can you imagine the same folks speaking/acting if Gore had been sitting when the planes crashed????
The reason the "left" wants seemingly intelligent presidents, and is less dogmatic in the campaign promises, is that they are aware that the world changes, that information comes to light and that it is not always the best thing to go on with your plan when your plan is now not in the best interests of the country due to changing circumstances. The "left" wants someone in place who can adapt and make continued best decisions, the right (in current times) really seems to want to elect a figurehead who can carry out policies, regardless of changing circumstances. Or as Karl Rove says "while you report on reality, we'll make a new reality".
I'd add Nixon to the Republican presidents that weren't thought of as idiots. Nixon may have been paranoid at the end of his presidency, and he certainly was strongly hated by a large portion of the populace over Watergate and Vietnam, but I think most folks would consider him intelligent.
ReplyDeleteRan into audio problems about a third of the way into the book - no hold.
ReplyDelete