Intellectually insulated - I guess you have ample opportunities to observe the affliction up there in San Francisco.

You blog looks great!

I lived in San Francisco for ten years until 1982. It's a marvelous place, but I don't know how you make it from day to day surrounded by such complete lefty loons.

Good luck with that.

This is perhaps one of the dumber criticisms I've read of Bush over the course of his presidency, which is obviously a big statement. Why in God's name would George W. Bush waste presidential time reading a book about why the Iraq War was a mistake?

First of all, most of that ever-expanding library is the work of partisan and journalistic (excuse the redundancy) hacks attempting to cash in on a public sentiment. Deserved or not, it is literary graffiti on the edifice of his presidency. The same books would have been written by the same authors on almost the same dates had we not invaded Iraq, or invaded Iran or North Korea instead.

Second, what could be learned from the rare critique written in good faith that could not be more incisively learned by calling a series of meetings or appointing presidential auditors to interview the appropriate offices? It's almost comical to criticize Bush for not reading what outsiders have to say about his job; like the idiot sports columnist who complains that the head coach doesn't read his columns.

Third, it's almost frightening when you reflect on how seriously intellectuals (or more accurately, the literati) are starting to take themselves again. After all, it's academic true-believers far more resembling Richard Cohen than Mr. Bush who have manufactured all of the otherworldly horrors mankind has inflicted on itself over the last 150 years.

If there was ever a group "inside the bubble" it's Leftists. I've had to listen to more than a few arguing the finer points of Marxism.

Perhaps Cohen could provide a list of the books he's read that challenge his world view. He's an intellectual poseur.

Actually, SF is a good place to be a conservative--at least if you have a blog. I creep around smiling and nodding, and not saying much...but inside I'm fizzing with outrage and things to write about.

You might observe that the first book recommended was panned as a near-vanity publication unreflective of the story it sought to tell. Essentially, the list reflects a man who seldom makes informed distinctions, unless badly.

Cheers

This is part & parcel of complaints about Bush's "arrogance" as demonstrated by his failure to heed the advice of people (such as Cohen) who fundamentally disagreed with him. It reveals far more about the critic than the criticized.

Cohens supercilious sneering reveals only the shallowness of his own existence.

Dear Mr. Weidner: Agreeing with your larger point, when you wrote this:

"And we've fought guerilla and terrorist enemies before, and many have been harder nuts to crack than al-Qaeda."

what guerilla/terrorist enemies did you have in mind? The Filipinos, 1898-1902? The various Indian tribes in the United Sates in the nineteenth centuries? Nicaragua in the 1920s-30s? Specifically, which ones did you have in mind?

You make a fine point when you say the Left hates Victory. It is the Tory all leftists hate most. They do love a different kind of Tory: Confiscatory, soon to be introduced by The One and Charlie Rangel after his ethics whitewashing. All we can do is laugh, as the Left is in charge for at least two more years. Also the sight of a black political leader needing muliple coats of whitewash is amusing.

I think you are too optimistic, though, about claiming victory in Iraq. At best, it is a victory in a campaign. The real historical charge against Geo. W. is that he was unable to complete the war he planned. A great danger now is that The One will declare victory and go home, leaving Islamic extremism free to regroup and begin again. The One is plainly bored by foreign affairs, thinking to remake the United States according to the hazy vision he has. He will soon learn the truth of what his hero, Kennedy said to Richard Nixon:

"Foreign affairs is the only important issue for a President to handle, isn't it? ... I mean, who gives a shit if the minimum wage is $1.15 or $1.25, compared to something like Cuba?"

(From RESTLESS GIANT by James Patterson.)

He may learn this lesson, but the nation will pay a fearful price for the tuition. There's still a fearfully long way to go in this conflict, and unlike the good fortune the nation had when FD Roosevelt was succeeded by Truman, this time we will be led by an elite-proclaimed "smart man."

As I said, better laugh. The alternative is too dreadful to contemplate.

Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster

I've given up expecting any rational analysis of the Bush administration from the left. There is something visceral in their reaction to anything regarding Bush that stifles actual thought. It's emotional to the core.
Bertrand Russell on emotion: “The degree of one's emotions varies inversely with one's knowledge of the facts.”

Gregory,
Victory in Iraq depends on how you define it. I think we had a lot of different goals (here's my list) and we have achieved enough of them to claim a victory. Other goals we won't be able to assess for a long time.

But it is just one campaign in what's going to be a long war. My guess is that Obama and others will have to follow the template Bush has created, much like we followed Truman's in the Cold War. But this is just my armchair theorizn'.

What Cohen seems to completely miss is that, as president, Bush had access to more information and intelligence (including analysis by some of the best minds in and out of the military) than ANY of the people writing their analyses of the Iraq war. What he DIDN'T have was the luxury of hindsight.

So what could he POSSIBLY learn from some author that he didn't already live every day for the better part of his presidency?

Cohen is so out of it he thought the fact his sister is a l**esbian was a persuasive argument against Prop. 8. He actually wrote a column about it.

I'm pleased Bush is reading about the Korean War. Korea may turn out to be the most apt model for Iraq. As Thom says, Bush doesn't need to read second-hand accounts of Iraq.

As for Cohen's other suggestions, he doesn't know if Bush read "The Best and the Brightest" years ago. Or "The Leopard," for that matter.

As I recall, JFK read Ian Fleming's Bond books while in the White House.

Re: Richard Cohen...

Wow! what a powerful concise, terse, indictment.
Great piece of writing.

The real reason reason for Cohen's insulation is that the WaPo had to stick him in an office by himself, far away from the nubile co-worker at whom he was directing unappreciated amorous advances. Must be tough stuck in a room by himself -- although the isolation must allow him to wank on a keyboard with one hand while the other strokes, er, ego.

"the Iraq Campaign has been very cheap and easy on a historical scale. Korea was worse by an order of magnitude"

Heck, a mere 10 days of the Battle of the Bulge killed more Allied troops than have been lost to date in Iraq; and that battle went on for another 30 days, killing 19,000+ Allies in a 40-day span.

You're certainly right that we lack perspective.

Cohen has been an idiot in print for quite a long time. See also here.

So Cohen has 3 weeks to find another job?

Oh my God, the fug of smug that wafts from the excerpts of Cohen's column are staining my ceiling as we speak! Now I know why I got that sudden sinus headache just now.

The whole thing is "OMG he doesn't watch my favorite teevee shows, he is soooooo square! Dullsville, man! I'm not asking him to ask me out to the prom! He's not like the cool guys." Wanna bet that Cohen hasn't done more than skim those pretentious tomes he listed He probably keeps them on his shelved in plain view (tacky jackets removed, of course), to show how erudite he is. But his writing style proves his actual reading material is somewhere on the level of those Chicken Soup books.

Cohen is nothing more than a liberal emoticon, along with that black numbskull that writes turgid crap and shows up on Sunday shows as the ultimate token. Ennui-provoking. Tiresome. Predictable. Lame. Retreads. Ugh. Awful.

The real question is why anyone would read Richard Cohen. He hasn't had an original idea in years. All his articles for the past eight years have been written under the influence of Bush Derangement Syndrome.

The sad truth, I have come to believe, is that Cohen and those on the left are so insulated intellectually--as well as economically, recreationally, spiritually, and morally--that they are simply not able, since sometime in the 1960s, to conjure any semblance of seriousness or realism in examining questions of war. (Worse, that might be the case for most of the West in general.)

The left's arguments against the Iraq war caused Iraq to be much more difficult than it needed to be, and they are precisely the same arguments that caused us to lose in Vietnam--and would have guaranteed our losing in Korea, in WWII, in WWI, etc., etc.

SAT's and GRE's are considered rough and ready IQ measurements and, curiously enough, Bush's were a bit higher than Kerry's, as were his college and graduate school grades.

This is not to make Bush out to be an intellectual, and that is not a criticism, considering how intellectuals have reacted to most important issues. But the trope of "Bush is an idiot" isn't accurate and speaks more to the leftist need to see its opponents not as mistaken or wrong-headed, but as stupid and/or evil.

That's reason #3,582 why I have for many years been a former leftist, although in truth I was never much of one to begin with.

I can hardly wait to see Barack's list. I am sure the Chosen One will have all sorts of books like Steyn's "America Alone", Goldberg's "Liberal Fascism" and Amity Shlaes' "Forgotten Man" that will broaden his perspective and ensure he is not just learning what he already knows. Right?

What Cohen seems to completely miss is that, as president, Bush had access to more information and intelligence (including analysis by some of the best minds in and out of the military) than ANY of the people writing their analyses of the Iraq war. What he DIDN'T have was the luxury of hindsight.

Amen, amen, amen.

What's sad is that Cohen and his arrogant ilk in the press have such an absurdly inflated opinion of their own intellect that they cannot conceive that anyone of Bush's inferior brain power (to them) could be right or that they could possibly be wrong. Even being an Ivy league grad doesn't elevate his mental status because, in their eyes, he is just so "fly-over". I stopped reading Cohen years ago because of his arrogance, long before I tired of his point of view. Seems I'm not missing anything.

My recommendation for Cohen to balance his one-sided reading list is "Moment of Truth In Iraq" by Michael Yon.

The key to sanity in today's world is not to read anything unless it is some kind of instructional manual on making something with your hands. Everthing else is unprovable, and even if you could verify any truth or lie in it, you have no way to change a damn thing. "Baa, Baa, Baa"
Sincerely,
"Wiffenpoof"