In an interview with The New York Times, Matthew Dowd, former chief campaign strategist for George Bush, explains why he now feels his faith in George Bush was misplaced. Despite all the smears against John Kerry during the 2004 campaign, Dowd now admits that Kerry was right:
In a wide-ranging interview here, Mr. Dowd called for a withdrawal from Iraq and expressed his disappointment in Mr. Bush’s leadership.
He criticized the president as failing to call the nation to a shared sense of sacrifice at a time of war, failing to reach across the political divide to build consensus and ignoring the will of the people on Iraq. He said he believed the president had not moved aggressively enough to hold anyone accountable for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and that Mr. Bush still approached governing with a “my way or the highway” mentality reinforced by a shrinking circle of trusted aides.
“I really like him, which is probably why I’m so disappointed in things,” he said. He added, “I think he’s become more, in my view, secluded and bubbled in.”
In speaking out, Mr. Dowd became the first member of Mr. Bush’s inner circle to break so publicly with him.
He said his decision to step forward had not come easily. But, he said, his disappointment in Mr. Bush’s presidency is so great that he feels a sense of duty to go public given his role in helping Mr. Bush gain and keep power.
Mr. Dowd, a crucial part of a team that cast Senator John Kerry as a flip-flopper who could not be trusted with national security during wartime, said he had even written but never submitted an op-ed article titled “Kerry Was Right,” arguing that Mr. Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat and 2004 presidential candidate, was correct in calling last year for a withdrawal from Iraq.
It is good to see Dowd questioning his support for George Bush, but this was not his only lapse in judgement. Last year he also advised Dick DeVos, the Republican candidate for Governor of Michigan who is so far to the right he makes Bush and Cheney appear moderate in comparison. DeVos also exceeded Bush’s dishonesty in presenting his views. While Bush would often slip in code words to the religious right while pretending to be more moderate in public, DeVos would imply one thing over state-wide media one day and then say the opposite on a Christian radio station the next.
Dowd has one aspect correct. Bush has failed miserably in asking Americans outside of the Military for shared sacrifice for the War effort.
We’re all fat, dumb and happy, continuing to go to our shopping malls, and eating cheetos on the couch watching American Idol while our Brave Men overseas are fighting for Freedom. It’s disgusting.
There are virtually no Americans here at home, outside of Military Families who are sacrificing for the War effort.
You know, we could never fight a War like WWII again. We Americans are too G-damned lazy, soft, politically correct, and not willing to serve our country.
Do you know that the percentage of Americans who ever serve in the Military is less than 1%? That’s an astoundingly low figure.
Shameful. Utterly shameful.
I see you’ve put me on Censor mode Chisud.
Thanks, but no thanks.
Typical Liberal. You don’t support free speech. You’ll be happy to know that I will tell everyone possible on the Internet of the Censorship that goes on at so-called “Liberal Values.” YOu should rename it “Fascist Values.”
I’m deleting you from my “Favorites.” I’m outta here. Nice knowing you you Goddamn Hitlerite asshole.
Eric,
In response to Comment 1:
Most people, especially libertarians, don’t share the view you’ve expressed elsewhere that only those in the military have rights and would see nothing wrong with less than 1% of Americans having served in the military. (Note I’m accepting your number for the sake of discussion but that does not mean I accept it as correct, considering how most of the “facts” you include in your comments turn out to be incorrect.)
“You know, we could never fight a War like WWII again. We Americans are too G-damned lazy, soft, politically correct, and not willing to serve our country.”
I disagree. Things would be entirely different if we faced a situation such a World War II. In contrast, most Americans see through the lies that got us into this war.
In response to Comment 2:
How can you claim that you are being censored when your comments are showing up all over here?
You also have a strange definition of censorship. In other comments here you have opposed freedom of expression when it involves oppositon to the war and government, yet you consider moderation of blog comments censorship. While I have posted your comments, it would not be censorship if I decided to keep them off.
The right to free speech has nothing to do with posting at private web sites where the web owner has the right to determine what is posted. For someone who claims to be a libertarian, you sure have little understanding of private property.
Your view of censorship is just like your view of libertarianism. You don’t care if others are free of censorhip if they disagree with you, but only care if you personally can say what you please. Similarly, your view of libertarianism is that you don’t care if the rights of others are suppressed as long as you are free to go to toppless bars.