Blogocentric Formulations

Decision Points

         My current audiobook for the commute is George W. Bush's memoir, Decision Points. I'm admittedly not the guy's biggest fan, and he's pretty far from my favorite President of all time, but he was a central figure through most of the past decade of our nation's recent history and regardless of what we all think about him as a person or a President, his decisions shaped America's direction over the course of that decade. I was particularly intrigued by the following description of the book:

         "A groundbreaking new brand of presidential memoir, Decision Points will captivate supporters, surprise critics, and change perspectives on eight remarkable years in American history—and on the man at the center of events."

         So here I am thinking, "Okay, the guy obviously was in the midst of some pretty significant decisions; it'll be interesting to hear his thoughts on 9/11, The War on Terror, the controversial elections, etc." He's received some pretty scathing criticisms over his two terms in office, and it surely left him with some food for thought after the fact... right?

         Oh, how naive I was.

         The entire book (well, I'm just over halfway through at the moment, but I see a pattern here) is basically a justification for the decisions he made. He made them, he thinks he's right, he'd do it again if he had the opportunity. Sure, he admits that he'd like to change little things (like sound bytes in speeches that didn't come off as intended), but the real meat and bones of the decisions are justified and explained away as if he'd been right all along and we were the ones who needed to see the light.

         The controversial 2000 election? Gore's fault for drawing it out.

         No WMD in Iraq? Well, Saddam Hussein would have been a threat sooner or later.

         Curtailing of civil liberties post 9/11? U.S. soil hasn't been attacked since 9/11, so it worked.

         Torture in Guantanamo? The lawyers assured him it wasn't legally defined as torture and it wasn't like they did anything that caused lasting physical or mental harm. Oh, and we haven't been attacked on U.S. soil since 9/11, so it must be working, right? (He likes to employ post hoc fallacies.)

         Overall, the book just has the feeling of someone who - like during his time in office - is 100% convinced that his way is the best way, and no one is going to tell him otherwise. This wasn't a book to reveal his change of perspective; it's a book that's trying to change your perspective (if you disagreed with anything he did in office). The only thing - as a critic - that I'm surprised by, is how consistently and unabashedly he justifies every decision he made in office. Most of us, if given the opportunity to reflect upon our past, will find plenty of things we would have liked to have handled differently... and most of us didn't have to make decisions related to national tragedies, war, civil rights violations, and questionable political processes.

         What I find most fascinating about this memoir is his confident assurance that he was in control and competently dealt with every issue that came across his desk. Don't get me wrong; I really don't think he's a complete moron, and I know he had some particularly trying times while he was in office; but to consistently hear him validate his decisions in an "I knew what I was doing and I'd do it again" kind of way makes me wonder what really went on during his tenure in the Oval Office. With all the criticism and all the things we now know (like no WMD in Iraq), what does it say about someone who asserts that every decision made was the right decision, made with completely authority and control? It doesn't make me see a strong, confident Commander in Chief; it makes me see someone who is so stubborn that he can't even admit that - in retrospect - a particular decision was a bad one, or that a situation (for which there is public outcry) could have been handled better. (Re: the WMD issue, he actually said that Saddam would have probably been a threat sooner or later, so that was justification enough for going around U.N. Security Council approval and invading anyway.)

         I admire people who stick to their convictions. People who have a vision and the wherewithal to make it happen. And to his credit, I think George Bush has both of those qualities. But another quality he seems to have - which is not so desirable - is the stubbornness and downright refusal to see the other side of an issue. There are no shades of gray and zero room for negotiation. He's 100% right and anyone who disagrees with him is dead wrong.

         For what it's worth, I think George Bush probably got a worse reputation than he actually deserved. I'm not a conspiracy theorist who thinks that Dick Cheney was a behind-the-scenes puppeteer, or that he was as inept a President as he sometimes came off in speeches... and there were times during his presidency where I think he did a decent job. But I also think that it's sad someone who played such a pivotal role in America's recent history apparently does not have the ability to look back at anything in retrospect and see how it could have been handled differently.

         Decision Points is an interesting book. It definitely gives you some insight into George Bush's thought process and how his values and past history created the man that became our forty-third President of the United States. It's worth a read if you have an interest in politics and history, but (and I guess this shouldn't come as a surprise) it's not going to change your perspective about him. If you agree with his policies and decisions, you'll probably agree with them even more after reading this book. If you don't agree with his policies and decisions, there's nothing in this book that's going to "surprise critics" or "change perspectives." For what it's worth, I'm glad I read the book. At the very least, I can say that I listened to his opinions on the issue, told in his words. But I still don't agree with a lot of the decisions he made.