Haven't We Been Saying This All Along?

From Dan Froomkin at the Washington Post:

President Bush is no longer "the commanding, decisive, jovial president you've been hearing about for years in so much of the mainstream press."

"...it turns out that Bush is in fact fidgety, cold and snappish in private. He yells at those who dare give him bad news and is therefore not surprisingly surrounded by an echo chamber of terrified sycophants. He is slow to comprehend concepts that don't emerge from his gut. He is uncomprehending of the speeches that he is given to read. And oh yes, one of his most significant legacies -- the immense post-Sept. 11 reorganization of the federal government which created the Homeland Security Department -- has failed a big test."

Umm, I'm sorry, but I have been rolling that sort of stuff off my tounge since the 2000 presidential election campaign. Now, five years and another presidential campaign later, we are still stuck with the man (and have three long years to go).

Challenge - Re-read the Froomkin passage above and then answer this question: Is that really the type of personality best suited to lead the United States of America in a post-9/11 world? I think the answer from most Americans on that question would be a resounding "no."

But voters insisted on "restoring dignity" to the White House, placing their own personal morals over the best long term interests of the country. A president who is "cold and snappish," slow on the uptake, and unwilling to listen to bad news? That seems more like the "un-dignity" to me, not to mention dangerous. (For my money a "President Gore" would have us standing tall and proud right now.)

America is strong and will survive someone like George W. Bush. But be prepared...she will look pretty battered come 2009.