{"id":3089,"date":"2009-05-06T00:13:39","date_gmt":"2009-05-06T05:13:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/?p=3089"},"modified":"2009-05-06T00:13:39","modified_gmt":"2009-05-06T05:13:39","slug":"the-post-bush-press","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2009\/05\/06\/the-post-bush-press\/","title":{"rendered":"the post-Bush Press&#8230;"},"content":{"rendered":"<br \/>\n<blockquote>\n<div align=\"center\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.newsweek.com\/id\/195666\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>Prisoners of the White House<\/strong><\/a><br \/>   <strong>By Evan Thomas<\/strong><br \/>   <font color=\"#990000\"><strong>NEWSWEEK<\/strong><\/font><br \/>   May 2, 2009<\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">It&#8217;s the curse of the modern presidency. Our chief executives need to make an active, aggressive effort to reach beyond their immediate circle of advisers, to demand fresh thinking and avoid the sycophancy that comes with the Oval Office. Otherwise, they&#8217;ll only hear what they want to hear &mdash; or what their aides tell them. To judge from &quot;War of Necessity, War of Choice,&quot; Richard N. Haass&#8217;s new book on presidential decision-making with regard to Iraq, George W. Bush lived in a bubble, partly of his own making, that walled off creative dissent or even, in some cases, common sense.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">Mindful of his predecessor, Barack Obama seems to be trying harder to make sure he hears all sides. On the night of April 27, for instance, the president invited to the White House some of his administration&#8217;s sharpest critics on the economy, including New York Times columnist Paul Krugman and Columbia University economist Joseph Stiglitz. Over a roast-beef dinner, Obama listened and questioned while Krugman and Stiglitz, both Nobel Prize winners, pushed for more aggressive government intervention in the banking system&#8230;<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<div align=\"justify\">[h\/t to Ralph for the heads up.] It&#8217;s really hard to change gears when there&#8217;s a style that&#8217;s been going on for eight years. What I&#8217;m referring to is interpreting what Obama does <strong><u>in terms of Bush<\/u><\/strong> or as <u>a <strong>reaction to Bush<\/strong><\/u>. The central example of the first is the rush to examine the hidden motives for everything he says. What&#8217;s he really trying to do? How is he positioning himself for his own agenda? Is he hiding his Liberal-ness? Is he really a Conservative? This article borders on the second interpretation. Because Bush never got advice, Obama is making sure to hear all sides, or is trying to appear to be someone who is seeking input. In other words, his motive is to be &quot;not Bush&quot; or to be seen as &quot;un-Bush-like.&quot;  <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">This tendency to report the news as if the real story is in the background has intensified during the Bush Administration for a really good reason. An example that I tried to dissect <a href=\"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2009\/05\/01\/09082002\/\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>recently<\/strong><\/a> was the campaign for the Iraq War launched on September 8, 2002 with a leak to the <strong>New York Times<\/strong>, an appearance on <strong>Meet the Press<\/strong> by Dick Cheney, and Condi Rice&#8217;s guesting on <strong>CNN<\/strong> &#8211; all scripted and coordinated, even down to some of the exact same lines [&quot;mushroom shaped cloud&quot;]. The basic approach to the news then was paranoid, &quot;What do they really mean?&quot; &quot;What are they trying to get us to think?&quot;<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">In this case, Obama invited Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz over for dinner. They are Nobel Laureate Economists who have been of a single tongue in criticizing Obama&#8217;s Stimulus\/Bank Bail-out Plan as too light. I suggest the following motive for their being asked to come for a talk at the White House. <font color=\"#300030\"><strong>Obama wanted to know what they thought<\/strong><\/font>. Pretty radical thinking, trying to take him straight. Straight? What&#8217;s such a person doing in Washington? He certainly doesn&#8217;t need to prove that he&#8217;s not Bush, or even Bush-like. Any fool can see that. He said he was going to seek broad opinions during his campaign. It&#8217;s hard to imagine that he feels totally solid about the bail-out himself, having passed it with a wall of opposition from the other side of the aisle. Maybe he really wants to know why they&#8217;re worried&#8230;  <\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">Here&#8217;s a pre-Bush version [or a more enlightened post-Bush version]: <\/div>\n<ul>\n<div align=\"justify\"><font color=\"#300030\"><strong>Last week, President Obama had dinner with noted economists Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz to discuss the Bank Bail-out. They have both been strong advocates for a greater level of governmental involvement.<\/strong> Roast Beef was served. <strong>This kind of open dialog between the President and prominent critics contrasts sharply with the more insular style of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, his predecessors&#8230;<\/strong><\/font> <\/div>\n<\/ul>\n<ul> <\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Prisoners of the White House By Evan Thomas NEWSWEEK May 2, 2009 It&#8217;s the curse of the modern presidency. Our chief executives need to make an active, aggressive effort to reach beyond their immediate circle of advisers, to demand fresh thinking and avoid the sycophancy that comes with the Oval Office. Otherwise, they&#8217;ll only hear [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3089","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3089","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3089"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3089\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3089"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3089"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3089"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}