Is Bush Unhinged?

Did Bush really say "I hit the trifecta" - or is that just urban myth?

I understand and respect what you are saying here, Craven.


In any case, I don't consider my characterization of Bush as a "moron" to be character assasination.

I consider it giving him the benefit of the doubt!

"Trifecta" is an awfully big word for Bush to manage, let alone successfully use in a sentence.

I vote for urban legend. LOL!!

Dlowan and Titus re Bush hit the trifecta
Dlowan and Titus, here is the published and confirmed statement by the person to whom Bush made the hitting the trifecta comments in BOLD. ---BBB
---------------------------------------------------

REMARKS BY OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIRECTOR MITCHELL E. DANIELS, JR. AT CONFERENCE BOARD ANNUAL MEETING
October 16, 2001
Cipriani 42nd Street, New York, NY

Thank you, Dick Cavanagh and distinguished guests. It is a privilege, a genuine privilege -- all speakers say that; I say it with full sincerity tonight, given the illustrious history of this organization and the illustrious membership of today, reflected in this room.

I spent a good part of this afternoon with the now-world famous mayor of this great city, and thus am reminded, in having the honor to be with you this evening, of the comment of his earlier counterpart, his Honor, Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago, who once described an occasion like this as the pinochle of success.

The Conference Board is renowned to all of my colleagues in government today, as it was to all of my colleagues during my years in business really as the authority, the source of unbiased, unvarnished counsel and advice. I have always associated with the view that expert advice is a comfort, even when it's wrong. It is rarely wrong when it comes from the people at the Conference Board.

President Reagan used to say that an economist is someone who sees something work in practice and wonders if it works in theory. But he wasn't talking about Gail Fosler or Dick Cavanagh, or any of the people with whom you are so fortunate as to be associated here.

So it is a humbling experience to be with you. Now, humility, you may have read, is deemed a cardinal virtue in this administration. Washington is having real trouble deciding what to do with us. The Washington Post, in what I thought was a somewhat snide column early in the administration, counted up the number of times the President or others on the crew had spoken of the need to avoid arrogance, to maintain a pose of suitable humility, and defined it as "the flamboyant humility of the Bush administration." I guess they have spent too much time covering people of hubris to know quite how to accommodate.

But the President even yesterday, as he gathered the senior management, some 3,000 or more of the federal government in Constitution Hall, reminded us yet again of the need to approach our duties as I approach this evening, with some modesty.

This comes rather naturally to some of us, and this was not the only reminder I have received. Probably the most graphic one came a couple, three months ago, when I was bumped at the last minute from "Good Morning America" in favor of live liposuction. One of those important, perspective-setting life lessons.

We are humble about the assignment that the American people have given to President Bush, and that he in turn has given to some of us. But lately, our humility is matched by a genuine sense of fulfillment in the work we do. Particularly lately, in the last month, I hope that even the most skeptical among you has felt some measure of appreciation for the swiftness and decisiveness with which this government has proved that such an enterprise can act when called upon to do so.

And the degree of bipartisanship and comradeship that I have been able to witness, across the branches of this government, has really been quite startling. I have seen long-time -- maybe lifelong -- antagonists share tears, embraces. I have seen spontaneous eloquence of a kind that is common in your country, Mr. Chairman, but all too infrequent, I think, in the halls of American government.

We have seen the leadership of both parties in Congress face restlessness and challenge for the way in which they have frequently compromised and come together. This in other ages was known as statesmanship, and it has re-emerged in our Republic under the direst of circumstances, and it is something for which I believe all citizens of this republic ought to be very grateful.

Now, I want to speak tonight of our fiscal and economic affairs. And I take as a salient point of departure this very bipartisanship that I have just applauded. The bipartisanship you see in Washington, I am here to testify, is authentic. It is uplifting. It is efficacious. And it is expensive.

By the time that a bipartisanship majority or a consensus has been assembled, quite often costs have been escalated to bring on board those who were at first hesitant. And so we are now spending, you may have noticed, a lot of extra money, a lot of unforeseen money.

The good news is we had an awful lot of it to spend. The American fiscal situation has probably never been so strong as it is in calendar 2001, as it was on September 10th. With all the events of this year, we will run an enormous surplus, either the second- or third largest in American history -- even after the impact of recession and extra spending up through September 30th.

The President favors conditions of budgetary balance, and -- particularly looking ahead to the unfunded liabilities of our nation -- surplus, and the reduction of outstanding national debt against the day when those bills come due, and has been pursuing a balanced fiscal policy that included tax reduction for long-term growth, debt reduction, and moderate spending growth to make those first two objectives possible.

He had always listed, throughout his campaign and since, the reasons why the nation might depart from this policy, reasons he had given as acceptable for running fiscal deficits: for war, recession, or emergency. As he said to me in mid-September, "Lucky me. I hit the trifecta."

The article can be found here.

Yeah, he said it. I looked it up on Westlaw and Lexis/Nexis, and its there.

BBB

The piece that heads this thread is really very astute. Thank you kindly for posting it.

Is Bush unhinged? Nah, his handlers would never allow him to show it.

And by the by, it has always seemed to me that character assassination is most likely to occur in small minds which can not conjur up substantive points, or when no substantive points can be made at all. The most extreme of defensive postures, and thus highly suspect.

Gotta disagree. When character assasination is the ONLY or MAIN point brought up against a person, then it's highly suspect.

Arguments against Bush are VERY heavy on substantive points, and it just so happens to be that his character is for sh*t as well. Thus, character assaults on the man are easy to make, and completely fair game.