"Draper emerges with a treasure trove of detail and anecdotes, but he often doesn’t delve — or isn’t allowed to delve — into the deeper questions. Early in his book Dead Certain, he tells the story of Bush’s failed bid for Congress in 1978. Against all the best advice, Bush decided to run against a conservative West Texas Democrat, Kent Hance. He lost badly, but not embarrassingly. Explaining his decision to Draper, he said, "You can’t learn lessons by reading. Or at least I couldn’t. I learned by doing. I knew it was an uphill struggle. But see, I’ve never had a fear of losing. I didn’t like to lose. But having parents who give you unconditional love, I think it means I had the peace of mind to know that even with failure, there was love." Wolffe reviewing "Dead Certain."
Wolffe is a very clever man. He and Olberman "play" well together. Wolffe remains essentially European in his manifested attitudes. His casual dismissal of the behaviour of Royal Navy and Royal Marine people in Iranian captivity as "meaningless" had much about it that most Americans would not approve. We would not tolerate that behavior in our forces.
Nevertheless, his review of this book points to a couple of interestin’ thangs about Dubya.
Bush’s insistence that he reads a lot and his statement that one can not learn from reading are mutually exclusive, I think. I am reliant on a few things the Army taught me. One of these was the Myers-Briggs personality indicator classification system. This system has been useful to me in understanding people I meet and work with. Dubya hates tests like that and also hates talk about it. That is a typical reaction of several of the grous classified under the test.
I don’t think he is lying in the ridiculous statement about "learning." I think that he is (in MB terms) A "Sensory-Perceptive" (SP) type. This groups typically does not learn much by reading and is quite capable of holding two mutually exclusive views at the same time. About 50% of the American public belong to this broad group. Look it up.
Then there is the matter of "unconditional love." There is very little of that in the world. Rational beings may SAY that they love without condition, but it is not usually true. I suppose there are parents who will love a child who is a sadistic child molester and murderer, but they must be few. In fact, only dogs love unconditionally, at least until they meet Michael Vick.
That kind of statement from Bush reveals how much he needs to be loved. that probably points to something less than "unconditional love" in his past. Perhaps that is why he needs to surround himself with adoring women.
This "biography" of Bush reinforces my belief that he will never, never, never give up in Iraq. Never. pl
There ought to be a lot of room in this post for enraged comment by loving parents and defenders of Her Majesty’ Forces.