Bush 36,000
I, for one, cannot think of a better man to serve as custodian of the Bush legacy:
Former President George W. Bush took a step closer Thursday to establishing an “action-oriented think tank” alongside his future presidential library by naming James K. Glassman, the longtime journalist and former administration official, as its founding executive director.
Mr. Glassman, who served in the Bush administration as chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors and later undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs, will be charged with building a public policy institute intended to advance some of the issues that Mr. Bush embraced as president.
Glassman is, of course, better known to bloggers who like to make fun of know-nothing conservatives as the author of the late nineties bestseller Dow 36,000. I think that’s the kind of detachment from reality you need to dedicate your life to bolstering the reputation of the Bush administration.
16 Responses to “Bush 36,000”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
September 4th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Were Michael Brown and Bernard Kerik unavailable?
September 4th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
When they use this phrase,
“ideals of freedom, opportunity, responsibility and compassion,” to describe the Bush think tank,
all I can think of is a BDSM
themed website.
I don’t think it is just me.
September 4th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Re: a public policy institute intended to advance some of the issues that Mr. Bush embraced as president.
Hopefully one of these bright boys will be able to come out with a position paper on why depriving prisoners, not convicted of any crime, of 11 straight days of sleep is a good idea.
Or why drilling in the Arctic will solve global warming, or something.
Or how the dread Venezuela-Bolivia axis is going to launch an invasion of South Texas.
September 4th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Glassman is, of course, better known to bloggers who like to make fun of know-nothing conservatives...
Pedantry alert! The adjective “know-nothing” in a political context refers to the nativist, anti-Catholic organization of that name in the 19th Century (and descendants thereof, e.g., the Minuteman Project.) “Know-nothing” is not a synonym for “fatuous,” despite often being misused as such.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing
September 4th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
later undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs,
His predecessor in that “office” was Karen Hughes. That was her title when she told impoverished women in a Cairo slum that she understood their plight, and thus the president understood, because she was a “working mom, too”.
I wonder why they didn’t give it to her, unless she’s moved into the servants quarters of the new house in Dallas to act as full time, live in Knob Polisher.
I hear Laura collects doorknobs.
September 4th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
“action-oriented think tank”? For a former President’s foundation to get much traction requires significant involvement from said Pres. But, that’s really just conjecture based on observation of the Clinton and Carter versions. I just can’t see W contributing much drive, so we’ll see how my theory pans out.
September 4th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
When Bushies use terms like “action-oriented think tank” they really intend the exact opposite.
September 4th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Yep, James Gary, your name is now synonymous with pedantry.
I think in the modern context, “know nothing” means purposely fatuous, not merely fatuous. It means elevating a rejection of science and knowledge and reality-based concerns to an ideology. The term fits and it works well.
Next you’re going tell us that a progressive refers to a member of a political movement that ended in the early 20th century so you can’t go around calling contemporary people or ideas “progressive”.
September 4th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Dow 36,000? I remember when that book came out. My mom had a similar book arguing that markets always rise and said I should read both of them. The book she had was published in 1928. And both books really did make the same argument. And both were catastrophically wrong. It’s no surprise that no such books were published in 1930, and it’s no surprise that they aren’t being published now.
September 4th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Krugman said that Glassman’s prediction might be accurate but with one extra character in the title, and we’d better pray the extra was the 3, not the 6 or a 0. Couple years later the Dow neared 7000.
September 4th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
[...] If you’re looking for a good laugh over the weekend, you might try Dow 36,000 by James Glassman, just hired as custodian of the George W. Bush legacy (hat tip Scott). It’s about the new strategy for profiting from the huge rise in the stock [...]
September 5th, 2009 at 7:15 am
[...] agree with Matthew Yglesias that George W. Bush could have found no one more appropriate than James Glassman to head his think [...]
September 5th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
His shoddy little front-blog, TechCentralStation, also went way long on the success of the Iraq War. Talk about your irrational exuberance.
September 5th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
No. 1 – you are so right! I hope W. realizes that he needs a triumvirate of first raters. Brown, Kerik, Glassman – like the three mouskateers!
Someone needs to get on this.
September 5th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
So, good luck with that.
September 5th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
Just you wait. Twenty years from now, the Bushies will have convinced much of the country that Dubya “kept us safe from terrorism after 9/11″ and belongs up there on Mount Rushmore just like Reagan (another presidential dog transmuted into a god) does.