From: Pam Colloff
To: Greg Curtis, Paul Burka, Evan Smith, Skip Hollandsworth, Joe Nick Patoski, and Patricia Kilday HartPosted Wednesday, March 29, 2000, at 3:15 AM ET
Everyone—
Regarding conservatism, compassionate and otherwise, Bush (before Bob Jones) seemed very adept at presenting himself in Clintonian, everything-to-everybody terms. He was against abortion, for the death penalty, and against gun control. But he could also placate Democrats: He was for beefing up education, he spoke passable Spanish, and he was even pro-Head Start. If you were left-leaning, well, it wouldn't be the end of the world if he moved into the White House. He was no Pat Buchanan.
I use the past tense because things seem more blurred now. Remember the photo that ran on the front page of the New York Times last fall of Bush kissing a black schoolgirl? It was a powerful image, and one I doubt we'll ever see again. Paul, I'm curious: Where do you think Bush stands now in the Republican ideological spectrum, with Buchanan on one end and perhaps Jack Kemp on the other? I'd like to think he's closer to Kemp than to Buchanan, but a constitutional amendment ending abortion—which Bush has danced around, saying he supports it but is not sure the nation is ready for it—is pretty radical stuff. Does he want to make us ready for it?
I had an interesting discussion about Bush this weekend with a fellow passenger on a flight from Baton Rouge to Houston. The passenger was a military man in his late 20s who was conservative, deeply religious, raised in Baton Rouge, and had served in the Gulf War under Bush the elder. Much to my surprise, he told me that he planned to vote for Gore. Why? He was offended that Bush had allowed 62-year-old Betty Lou Beets to be put to death last month (for killing at least one, probably two of her husbands and burying them in her backyard). Beets was an old woman, he said, and she had asked for clemency. "Why not give her life in prison?" he said. "Executing her didn't seem very compassionate to me."
Evan, regarding the underwhelming assortment of Bush books, I have yet to read one that really gets inside the man's head, the way Richard Ben Cramer did with his dad. It would be interesting to see what Cramer would find with W. as his subject. Joe Nick, regarding Bush the elder's accent, what about W.'s? He's starting to sound like a real hayseed. Paul, I'd be interested in hearing what you think the defining symbols of the campaign will be (or should be). George W. rolling oranges down the aisle of Great Expectations, or something a little more substantive?
Over and out,
Pam
Photograph of George W. Bush on the Slate Table of Contents by Paul J. Richards.
From: Pam Colloff
To: Greg Curtis, Paul Burka, Evan Smith, Skip Hollandsworth, Joe Nick Patoski, and Patricia Kilday HartPosted Wednesday, March 29, 2000, at 3:15 AM ET How conservative is George W. Bush? How capable? This week, the staff of
Texas Monthly magazine allows
Slate readers to eavesdrop as they discuss what kind of president Bush would make.The participants in this dialogue include
Texas Monthly Editor Greg Curtis, Executive Editor Paul Burka, Deputy Editor Evan Smith, Senior Editors Skip Hollandsworth and Joe Nick Patoski, Associate Editor Pam Colloff, and Contributing Editor Patricia Kilday Hart.
Reader Response from The Fray:
[Note: Should be read after most recent Dialogue entry of the week.]
I find Ms Hart's (perfectly legitimate) complaint [Wednesday] about the "news columns"--ie, that they're showing an abominable if visceral loathing of Mr Bush--quite charming in its innocence. She seems to have somehow managed to avoid realizing that such an attitude has colored reporting of the Clinton administration for years, of Mr Gore, and indeed of just about any gopher who stuck his head up far enough to be hit with a mallet. The sole recent exception---the esteemed Senator from Arizona---avoided this solely by pandering to the reporters' idiot sense of their own moral and intellectual superiority and even he would have been savaged had he had any chance of victory.
I don't particularly like Mr Bush, but he was elected twice by a real state and he did manage to generate an awful lot of money and support among real people. I'm not awfully fond of Mr Gore, but he is pretty smart and well-educated and any sensible analysis of his fundraising activities needs to balanced against a history in which Republicans outspent Democrats dramatically--it's hard not to see Republican complaints about the Clinton/Gore fundraising as analogous to their complaints about many of the administration's policies: how dare they steal our issues/our techniques?
I think they both deserve to be treated seriously, courteously, and dispassionately. The chance of this happening in the current media atmosphere is about equal to the chance I will wake up tall, blonde, and skinny. Why does not a professional journalist realize this as well?
--Alan Kornheiser
(To reply, click here.)
(3/31)
I'm not surprised Governor Bush could impress the Texas Monthly writers with his policy expertise in a friendly, sympathetic small-group discussion. Most journalists hardly study policy at all; very little expertise is required to impress them. And, there isn't a politician alive who does not look more impressive talking to a sympathetic small group than he does to a large audience.
I didn't see any recognition in their discussion that a Governor's education policy, however successful, might not be terribly relevant to the conduct of foreign relations and management of the Pentagon. Yet the next President is very likely going to spend much more time in each of these areas that in education, all campaign rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.
Finally, I had to laugh at the comment that a dropped "g" at the end of the word "asking" identifies Bush as a Texan. Here in Wisconsin we have a very successful Governor who uses only two "g's", the one in "Governor" and his middle initial. I promise you that no one will ever mistake Tommy Thompson for a Texan.
--Joseph E Britt
(To reply, click here.)
Uh, who the hell is Joe Nick? And what is he so cranky about? Am I missing something?
--Paul
(To reply, click here.)
[Yes you were. Joe Nick Patoski replied here, filling in with the missing entry that made everyone else think he was cranky.]
(3/28)
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
SPONSORED CONTENT
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
Twitter and Google Couldn't Stop Facebook. Can Anyone?
Nine Theories for Why It's So Hard To Find Chocolate in China
Why Is Buttoning Up Your Shirt All the Way Hollywood's Shorthand for Retarded?
George Clooney Almost Convinced Me To Like Up in the Air. Almost.
Why Is More Than Half of Congress Still Not on Twitter?
The Best Thing About Alice: Kathy Bates as the Queen of Hearts
Reader Response from The Fray:
[Note: Should be read after most recent Dialogue entry of the week.]
I find Ms Hart's (perfectly legitimate) complaint [Wednesday] about the "news columns"--ie, that they're showing an abominable if visceral loathing of Mr Bush--quite charming in its innocence. She seems to have somehow managed to avoid realizing that such an attitude has colored reporting of the Clinton administration for years, of Mr Gore, and indeed of just about any gopher who stuck his head up far enough to be hit with a mallet. The sole recent exception---the esteemed Senator from Arizona---avoided this solely by pandering to the reporters' idiot sense of their own moral and intellectual superiority and even he would have been savaged had he had any chance of victory.
I don't particularly like Mr Bush, but he was elected twice by a real state and he did manage to generate an awful lot of money and support among real people. I'm not awfully fond of Mr Gore, but he is pretty smart and well-educated and any sensible analysis of his fundraising activities needs to balanced against a history in which Republicans outspent Democrats dramatically--it's hard not to see Republican complaints about the Clinton/Gore fundraising as analogous to their complaints about many of the administration's policies: how dare they steal our issues/our techniques?
I think they both deserve to be treated seriously, courteously, and dispassionately. The chance of this happening in the current media atmosphere is about equal to the chance I will wake up tall, blonde, and skinny. Why does not a professional journalist realize this as well?
--Alan Kornheiser
(To reply, click here.)
(3/31)
I'm not surprised Governor Bush could impress the Texas Monthly writers with his policy expertise in a friendly, sympathetic small-group discussion. Most journalists hardly study policy at all; very little expertise is required to impress them. And, there isn't a politician alive who does not look more impressive talking to a sympathetic small group than he does to a large audience.
I didn't see any recognition in their discussion that a Governor's education policy, however successful, might not be terribly relevant to the conduct of foreign relations and management of the Pentagon. Yet the next President is very likely going to spend much more time in each of these areas that in education, all campaign rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.
Finally, I had to laugh at the comment that a dropped "g" at the end of the word "asking" identifies Bush as a Texan. Here in Wisconsin we have a very successful Governor who uses only two "g's", the one in "Governor" and his middle initial. I promise you that no one will ever mistake Tommy Thompson for a Texan.
--Joseph E Britt
(To reply, click here.)
Uh, who the hell is Joe Nick? And what is he so cranky about? Am I missing something?
--Paul
(To reply, click here.)
[Yes you were. Joe Nick Patoski replied here, filling in with the missing entry that made everyone else think he was cranky.]
(3/28)