Admiration for G.W.Bush is one of the predictors that a person's DNA contains Neanderthal elements.

The cited excerpt reads like a grade school essay.

George Bush is the person I admire most. I admire George Bush because he was the President. When George Bush was the President he did lots of things and that is why I admire George Bush the most.

And Nordlinger? Tell me that guy wasn't picked on in school!

NERDLINGER!

He's definitely got some pent up aggression.

I certainly wouldn't want admiration from anyone who admires Bush.

Considering the source, this is hardly a surprise. Though not one of "the former president's top aides," Nordlinger did write speeches for GWB's 2000 campaign.

In my experience -- and I'm just generalizing here -- the better the person, the more positive he is about George W. Bush.

In my experience -- and I'm just generalizing here -- the more a person is willing to sacrifice his soul to the Devil, the more positive he is about George W. Bush.

Dagblastit. Typo in my close tag. Ah...it's Friday.

the admiration remains strong in at least some corners

I see what you did there.

This, at least, is consistent with the polling that show Evangelicals as the group with the largest support for torture. Nothing says 'Christian' better than torture and death!

Apparently Americans were really great right after 9/11, but then got worse and worse as the years went by. I wonder why they got so much worse. Maybe it was due to their President. Eesh.

I am a very bad person, indeed.

In my experience -- and I'm just generalizing here -- the better the person, the more positive he is about George W. Bush.

I'm pretty positive about Bush. In fact, on Nordlinger's scale, I might be a saint. I probably wouldn't get chosen for Bush's jury, though. I would probably demand charges the prosecutor hadn't thought of.

I'm not sure what it means that the Dalai Lama "loves George W Bush". He has the capacity to love everyone, even the Chinese military responsible for killing thousands of his friends and fellow Tibetans. That he does not agree with many of Bush's policies is more significant. His Holiness has the capacity to feel love and compassion for most, if not all, people, including the Chinese. I'm sure Bush must be very likable and has the ability to engage people at a personal level that disarms them of their negative judgments. The telling part of the comments are that His Holiness does not agree with Bush's policies. In fact, is that not what defines a person's character? I've never met W, so cannot comment on his personality. I've seen the results of his policies and beliefs about people & cultures. He does not demonstrate compassion, in my view. He demonstrates bigotry and prejudice in his unwillingness to listen to other points of view.

That is what I find unacceptable about Bush. I'd love to hear the full conversation between the two with regard to policy.

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

And I'm much worse than Greg.

The Dalai Lama is dumb enough to fall for Bush's nice guy routine?!? I knew there was something I didn't like about that guy. I can't even understand this if he had been asked specifically about Bush, but citing Bush as an example of a positive influence we should look up to?? Really?!? Where the hell has this guy been for the past nine years?

I should mention that I've never been one to understand the greatness of the Dalai Lama. Not that I have anything against him, but I've never understood why non-Buddhists think he's so great. I suspect it's because they imagine it makes them deep to like someone like Mr. Lama.

I must be a GREAT person!

I am positive about George Bush!

I am positive he approved torture.
I am positive he misused phone tapping.
I am positive he tried to politicize the Justice Dept.
I am positive he is the WORST president EVER!

Ah, me and the Dalai Lama...

Steve, I like the red meat as much as anyone, but maybe you could talk about how the right is absolutely giddy right now over Specter's timing given his stature on the Senate Judiciary Committee?

I wonder what this guy admires about the Dalai Lama, other than the fact he (seems to) support Bush.

The Dalai Lama is a religious swindler. If people wanted to treat me like a king to be serene and shit, I am sure I could manage it.

Wait, maybe THAT'S what this bloke admires.

I guess it all depends on your value structure. Like, those of us who have one dislike Bush, and those of us who don't--and who are nursing ancient and incomprehensible enmity for everyone who isn't like them--are Bush fans.

In MY experience -- and I'm just generalizing here -- the more positive he is about George W. Bush, the more venal a person is. Of course there is an exception for people who can hate a sin but love the sinner. I just don't happen to know many of those people.

I suck.

St. John - I really can't see how this one doesn't knock the Dalai Lama down a few pegs. It's not just that he "loves" Bush (which is a meaningless phrase if you ask me, as even most Christians claim they "love" gay people, which is why they want to lure them away from homosexuality). The bigger issue is that when asked for an example of "a leader we should look up to as a positive influence," the first person he'd think of is Bush. Why not Obama? Why not any number of people? What an odd first choice.

As for him disapproving of Bush's policies, who doesn't? You can find a sizable number of conservatives who say they don't approve of Bush's policies. I see no significance in that. The significance is that the Dalai Lama doesn't seem to understand how Bush's policies were influenced by his personality, or to even be able to see through Bush's phony nice guy routine. And again, this isn't about whether he "loves" Bush. It's that he sees Bush as a positive influence we should look to. I doubt he'd say the same of the Chinese government.

That Nordlinger excerpt is AMAZING. What beautiful insight into the mind of the 20%'ers. It's everything I love about today's Republicans -- acknowledging the validity of only people who agree, projecting moral superiority without cause, and diplaying apoplectic shock that any reasonably thinking person could ever dislike GWB. It's like eating all of Baskin Robbins' flavors at once, really.

I guess "CLAP LOUDER!" was too trite.

Poor Nordlinger! He should be checked for a brain tumor. Oh no! Am I being snarky? Guess I am off his Christmas list--which I am at war with, anyhow; and also for being such a bad person.

Really, though, this kind of stuff makes me sick, and that is what it is supposed to do. It is the only way the republicans can get off nowadays.

"Admiration for G.W.Bush is one of the predictors that a person's DNA contains Neanderthal elements."

Bill D., please do not be dissing the Neanderthals. We really have very little clear idea on their actual culture, but I doubt it was as savage and lawless as Bush. It is not fair to hold them to quite the same standard.

Please keep in mind also that we are not direct descendants of Neanderthals. We are relatives, and some scientists think interbreeding occurred, but our line is separate from the Neanderthal line. As I understand it, we came through Homo Erectus, then through to the Cro-Magnon Homo Sapien line. So, again, I really hate to see a species with a 200,000-year existence and no written culture that we know of equated with a vicious thug like Bush.

I will never understand the slack-jawed hero worship of Bush by so many right wingers. It's understandable among his inner circle; you had to prove your loyalty just to get into that group. Kinda like getting initiated into the Hell's Angels.

But the rest of the right wing mystifies me. I've never felt the unswerving devotion to any president that these people profess for Bush.

GWB
BFF

lol

This morning I read the comments below ABC's article on the "$1000 per hour torture architects". Looks like all of Nordlinger's "better people" have commented there with the usual lame defenses and justifications for torturing people. Quite a depressing bunch I must say.

"The Dalai Lama is dumb enough to fall for Bush's nice guy routine?!?"

No, but he's polite enough to say he does. But I think what His Holiness admires about Bush is that Bush is easy to read. You always know where Bush stands. The Dalai Lama deals a lot with Chinese officials, who are notoriously obtuse and hard to deal with. Compared to those guys, Bush's simplicity is probably refreshing.

If this Nerdlinger critter were to stand before me, the awesomeness of how positive I am that George W. Bush is a criminal worthy of the very worst the Taliban has to offer would strike him deaf, dumb, blind, eternally impoverished to a point worthy of a Charles Dickens novel, and impotent beyond the help of all the Viagra pills in the world---combined.

Oh, and by the way: HAPPY MAY DAY!!!

fostert - Nice try, but that doesn't begin to cover Dalai's comment. He wasn't asked his opinion about Bush and found something polite to say. He was asked to cite a positive leader, and Bush was the first one that came to mind. He even went as far as to describe him as "very honest and a very good leader." I'm sorry, but that's not mere politeness. The man must either be a fool or dishonest, which would explain why he likes Bush so much.

Oh, and you used the word "obtuse" incorrectly. It definitely applies to Bush, and not as much the Chinese government. Per Yahoo, "Obtuse: Lacking quickness of perception or intellect. Characterized by a lack of intelligence or sensitivity." I understood what you meant, however.

They just mad about the bones he threw to education and healthcare.

But on the war and torture and wiretapping he's still the wingers' backdoor man.

The Dalai Lama is a religious swindler. If people wanted to treat me like a king to be serene and shit, I am sure I could manage it.

WIN

Apparently the GOP has a requirement that all members attend Clifford Irving's 'Historical Revisionism 101' course every few months.

Thanks! I was looking for a new blog name!

Shorter Nordlinger: "Please, God, make Georgie love me as much as I love him!"

This guy is probably the same kind of person who sneers at Obama's admirers for seeing him as "The One," and "The Messiah."

"Cares about tyranny?"

The National Review doesn't give a shit about tyranny. Opposing tyranny is a transparent, pathetic little tool for endorsing the elimination/oppression of certain kinds of people.

These days, it's mostly the elimination of Arabs they lobby for... At another time, it was maintaining/defending Jim Crow segregation that was their fashion. Later, support for apartheid in South Africa.

It's about power, for the right people - their kinds of people. Real life murder and slaughter is just fine with them, as long as it benefits their tribe.

Doctor Biobrain: fair enough about my poor use of vocabulary. I was having trouble finding the rights words and I flailed. What the Dalai Lama said was nothing new, he's said good things about Bush for years. He's being sincere, not dishonest. But I think we need to look at his statement in the context of Tibetan history and Buddhist thought. Tibet has long been caught up in a nasty combination of European Colonialism and Asian Power Politics. They've been screwed over by both kinds of diplomats and leaders, so His Holiness has very little trust for either Europe or Asia. Europeans have usually promised what they can't deliver, and Asians have usually deliberately reneged on their promises. Bush didn't deliver much for Tibet, but he didn't promise much either. So His Holiness could at least accept Bush's word at face value, something he couldn't do with other world leaders. Thus, the "very honest" characterization. And that feeds right into the "very good leader" characterization. Buddhism tends to view leaders favorably when their actions and intentions are in line with each other. And they tend to take a dim view of leaders who hide negative intentions inside seemingly positive actions. And with Bush, I think his actions and intentions were in line. I tend to view them both as negative, and the Dali Lama hints that he views a lot of Bush's actions as negative as well. But in a country that has historically fallen victim to the deceptions of outside powers, I can see where His Holiness is coming from.

In my experience -- and I'm just generalizing here -- the better the person, the more positive he is about George W. Bush.
.
So... is he a good person who just happens to like George Bush or is that what makes him good in your eyes?

Buddhism tends to view leaders favorably when their actions and intentions are in line with each other. And they tend to take a dim view of leaders who hide negative intentions inside seemingly positive actions. And with Bush, I think his actions and intentions were in line.

fostert - You've definitely picked the wrong place to making such absurd claims. I mean, Bush said we didn't torture. Bush said we were invading Iraq for WMD's that he claimed he had knowledge of. And then Bush kept saying things were getting better when they weren't. Bush pretended his tax cuts weren't to help the rich. Bush pretended Social Security Privatization was meant to "save" it. I could go on and on. Geez, hiding bad intentions within seemingly positive actions was his modus operandi and describes just about everything he did. The man wasn't just a bad president, but he was a liar too.

And you can defend the Dalai Lama all you want, but you're just embarrassing yourself. Again, he was asked to name a leader who was "a positive influence" and the first person he could think of was Bush. That is simply indefensible, even by your explanation that Buddhists think that a brutal dictator is a "good leader" as long as he's honest. And if that's what Buddhists think, then they're not very bright people. Honesty is good, but I'd rather have a liar who does good things than an honest man who does bad ones. And with Bush, we got the worst of both: A bad man who lied about the bad things he was doing.

And seriously, are you arguing that the Dalai Lama is such a small-minded man that his primary concern is how Bush treated his country; while ignoring what Bush did to everyone else's? Wow, I thought Americans were the selfish ones, but at least some of us give a damn about Tibet.

Reminds me of the famous line from (I believe) Upper West Side maven Pauline Kael. You know: "No one *I* know voted for Nixon."

Jay who?

While HH the Dalai Lama does not need any defense from me, or anyone else, I would like to comment further on this thread. I have heard him speak, many years ago, and have close friends who heard him speak as recently as last week. I have read some of his writings and understand a little about Buddhism, though I am not a practicing Buddhist. What is most true about HH is that he acknowledges his humanity/humanness and allows that Buddhism is not the only path to spiritual enlightenment. It is his path and he practices it as he understands it. What people tend to do with anyone who has a high profile in any area is to attach great significance to what they have to say, considering them as experts in their field. If nothing else, we are learning that to take anyone's expertise for granted based on their celebrity or ability to speak with authority is a mistake. To disagree with HH on his volunteering Bush as a man to be respected is understandable, and I find his remarks disheartening. OTOH, I do not have to follow blindly and discount my differences with him. I love the man and respect him as one of the most enlightened beings alive today. He is not infallible, and has never claimed to be.

Critical thinking has taken a serious hit over the past several years, and we have become immune to the exaggerations of the media and so-called experts, failing to apply critical analysis to what we are being told.

So, listen to your inner guidance and take whatever you are told as information, to be considered against what you know already. Be flexible and compassionate.

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

I don't think anyone will ever go broke underestimating the intelligence of Jay Nordlinger. He's the same fellow who always condemns racism--when white conservatives are its alleged victims.

It pleases me to no end that I do not meet Nordlinger's qualification for being a good, or at least admirable, person. It means I'm on the right track.

His Holiness says he loves W:

http://www.dalailama.com/news.362.htm

"fostert - You've definitely picked the wrong place to making such absurd claims."

No, I didn't, this is a pretty good forum for people with open minds. And my claims are hardly absurd. Think of who is a positive leader in this world. Start by eliminating any leaders from Europe or Asia, which have historically screwed over Tibet. Now eliminate the bad leaders from South America, Central America, and Africa, which is all of them. What you have left is a decision between the leaders of Mexico, Canada, and the US. Mexico has never had a good leader, and Canada is too boring rate a mention. The process of elimination only allows the leader of the United States. Maybe His Holiness should have said Obama, but he's never met him. And saying there are no good leaders isn't really helpful is it? But you obviously have some answer for His Holiness. So name a leader you'd prefer that's not from Europe or Asia, and I get to criticize that leader. Trust me, they won't look better than Bush in any fair analysis.

"That is simply indefensible, even by your explanation that Buddhists think that a brutal dictator is a "good leader" as long as he's honest."

I said no such thing and you know it. I don't like Bush one bit, but he wasn't a "brutal dictator." If you want to discuss things, we need to use reasonable terms. If you can't do that, then there's no reason for me to address your concerns.

"but at least some of us give a damn about Tibet"

Yes, some of us do, but you are obviously not one of them. Trying to project your ideology on the Tibetan people is not helpful. The Tibetans aren't your pets, they are real people with real concerns. And guess what? They liked Bush. And if you want to hate any culture that liked Bush, fine, but don't expect me to go along with it. And you certainly shouldn't claim you have any concern for the Tibetans when you want to force your ideology on them. You may be some kind of New Age hippie, but they certainly aren't.

"And if that's what Buddhists think, then they're not very bright people."

Claiming that those who follow the world's fourth largest religion are all stupid is a bad start. But to assume that all Buddhists even care about what the Dalai Lama thinks shows an ignorance of the world that only an American could hold. And a damn ignorant American at that. Here's a clue: most Buddhists don't even know who the Dalai Lama is. He's the leader of Tibet, not Buddhism. Even the Pope isn't the leader of Christianity, and he carries some real weight in the Christian movement. The Dalai Lama may be the leader of Tibet, but he's not the leader of any sect of even the Vajrayana branch of Buddhism. He's basically the referee between competing Tibetan sects of Vajrayana Buddhism.

"Honesty is good, but I'd rather have a liar who does good things than an honest man who does bad ones."

Fair enough, but His Holiness feels otherwise. As do many Buddhists. You can feel free to disagree with us. And you can offend His Holiness all you want. We don't care. It's your loss, not ours. And I've spent almost my entire life facing the usual discrimination you'd expect as a religious minority, so I'm used to it. And I've learned that liberals are every bit as bad as conservatives on that point (probably worse, actually). And it's one point where Bush was actually pretty good. But then again, I follow a religion that allows us to see both good and bad in the same person rather than simply brand a person as 'Good' or 'Evil.' Your religion obviously doesn't provide such flexibility and open mindedness.

I would be considered an awful person as I want to use the traditional (conservative?) approach to dealing with Bush/Cheney's termination. A mouthful of garlic, an axe and wooden stakes. No mirrors.

Huh. My experience is that my conservative friends have nothing good to say about Bush, as he betrayed most conservative values. He expanded the size of government, he added the Medicare drug plan, and then bungled the Iraq war planning in a way that makes Carter's Iran rescue plan look intelligent. Pundits rarely say it, but Bush lost the right-wing establishment. To defend him is purely an exercise in political gamesmanship.

This article has provoked me to say something I have been thinking about for a long time, but which may prove really unpopular.

Tibet, because of its geography and climate, is one of the poorest places on earth. Yet it was, for hundreds of years, subject to absolute rule by a religious class that managed to extort enough wealth from their poor subjects to build thousand-room palaces for themselves. Yes, the Tibetan people have accepted their way of life, but the willingness of the victims, out of religious conviction, does not diminish the crime of their opressors.

If you look at U.S. government maps from before the late 1940's you will discover that Tibet was shown as part of China. It was only after the Chinese revolution, when it was in the interest of American politicians to demonize the Chinese, that Tibet was shown as a separate country. It suited our purpose to portray the Tibetan religious class as brave freedom fighters, instead of what I believe they well may have been: authoritarian rulers who used religion as a tool to induce their people to accept injustice.

These monks were willing to serve the interest of anticommunists in the U. S. government at that time, and it does not surprise me that the current Dalai Lama is still talking away these people's crimes.

I know this is not a popular view. So, rip me to shreds if you want, but after what we have seen in the world in the last couple of decades, I don't give people much credit for being the good guys, just because they claim to be religious.