In Iraq, of course, Cheney and Rumsfeld turned out to be wrong.
But beyond policy mistakes, the President did not seem to feel the urgency of the situation, and thus Iraq could very well wind up destroying his legacy. You can also make a case that the same Bush mind-set worsened the Hurricane Katrina situation.
This is cold, not partisan, analysis. Americans are rightly confused and saddened by the Iraq situation. It has cost this country enormous blood and treasure. However, it is important to understand what really happened there. America did nothing immoral by removing a murderous dictator who had violated the first Gulf War cease-fire seventeen times, and who was hell-bent on causing trouble for America. No, the USA did not fail morally; we just weren’t very smart in anticipating the complexity of the Iraqi battlefield.
A more apprehensive president—Abraham Lincoln, for example—might have sensed the extent of the debacle sooner than President Bush and acted more swiftly to correct the situation. This is Monday-morning quarterbacking, I know, but if you study Lincoln, you will see a man who reacted to bad news quickly.
I mention President Lincoln because in an extensive private conversation I had with President Bush about Iraq and other matters, Lincoln was on his mind. After I interviewed the former President in October 1996, he invited me to have lunch. I was stunned. Very few people have ever treated me to lunch. It takes great courage.
In the dining room adjacent to the Oval Office, we talked off the record for about thirty minutes. I was impressed by the President’s knowledge and analysis of history. He clearly believed that his tough strategy against Islamic extremism had prevented further attacks on U.S. soil and that history would vindicate the Iraq campaign.
You can decide about the President’s belief. But I can tell you that personally, he seems to be a good guy. People I trust have told me that he’s kind to his staff, generally respectful of the immediate needs of others around him, and much more forgiving of insults than I am.
In fact, I asked the President on camera if he harbored any resentment toward those who hate and spread lies about him. He said no. Then, after the cameras were off, I said something like, “Come on, Mr. President, these people must make you angry.”
He just smiled. “They really don’t,” he replied.
Interviewing a president, as I’ve said before, is the toughest thing in journalism. There is a line you simply cannot cross because you must respect the office. With everybody else, I can aggressively challenge dubious answers and, within boundaries, even mock them. You may have seen a bit of that in my famous interview with Senator Hillary Clinton. I gave her some jazz that I could never have thrown at the commander in chief. I was respectful but forceful while speaking to Mrs. Clinton.
Talking with a president is obviously a different deal. Certainly, I can challenge, but I can’t denigrate the man (or woman) in any way. If you deviate from being respectful, most of the folks watching will hold it against you no matter what their political bent. That’s just the way it is with the commander in chief.
Having a president show you around the White House is somewhat intoxicating, and, of course, the president realizes this. Each room is meticulously cared for, and stories about past presidents abound. If you’re like me and study history, there is no more interesting place in the world, with the possible exception of Vatican City. I’ve visited the White House a number of times and it is always thrilling.
My presidential interviews with Mr. Bush have been major highlights in my long career. In each case, I felt I was fair but tough. In fact, President Bush the elder told me he enjoyed watching the jousts with his son on TV, even though I pushed the President hard to define “coerced interrogation” methods and openly doubted his immigration policy. When Mr. Bush failed to explain exactly how he would secure the southern border, I said directly, “You know, Mr. President, many Americans will not like your answer.”
To which he responded, “Well, that’s my answer.”
Okay.
As for President George Herbert Walker Bush, I have corresponded with him over the years and can tell you the man understands more about how this world works than anyone else I know. Some left-wing writers have speculated that there is tension between the Bushes, that the father and son disagree on some important issues. I have not seen that. I promised to keep President Bush the elder’s comments to me private until he dies, and I will keep that promise. He has been kind enough to brief me when I need to know something important about policy, and I greatly appreciate that. As you probably understand, in a world full of deceit and spin, it is very tough to get to the truth of some matters. Having access to a patriot like President George H. W. Bush has, for me, made forming opinions on some vital issues much easier.
By the way, in the lunch I had with the President, I have absolutely no idea what I ate. I simply can’t remember. I was so engrossed in the conversation, I could have eaten a caterpillar, for all I know.
President Bill Clinton
Unfortunately, President Clinton has not deemed it necessary to enter the no-spin zone, although I’ve tried hard to convince him to do so. I’ve met him and we chatted briefly, but our contact has been mainly between surrogates, and I’ve never formally interviewed him.
That’s a shame, because the conversation would be interesting, and I would value his opinion on a number of issues. In my view, Mr. Clinton sees the world in a unique way but has rarely been challenged in the media, so we don’t really know why he thinks what he thinks. He’s good at making statements, but how he’s arrived at his belief system remains a mystery, at least to me. Maybe after he reads this book he’ll see the wisdom of speaking to me, just as his wife finally did. Somehow, I don’t think Mr. Clinton was ever a bold, fresh guy and may not be fond of my approach. His best-selling autobiography is interesting but doesn’t get to the heart of the matter, pardon the pun. I’d like to know what’s behind the curtain.
President Clinton, of course, is the polar opposite of President George W. Bush. Raised in a working-class broken home, Clinton is as far away from the rich-guy syndrome as you can possibly get. The fact that he rose up from the tiny town of Hope, Arkansas, to become president is astounding. Even those who don’t like him have to admit that.
It would be unfair of me to attempt to define how President Clinton wields his power, because I simply don’t know. Stories about his temper and sense of entitlement are legion. Stories about my temper are legion. Who the hell knows what’s true in his case? So I’m not going to waste your time speculating.
I will say that, from my vantage point, Bill and Hillary Clinton greatly enjoy power. While I never got the feeling that George and Laura Bush woke up every day relishing the perks of their position, I believe the Clintons eat that relish up. I could be wrong.
Covering Bill Clinton’s presidency on the Factor was a nightmare. After the Lewinsky episode, there was no reasoning with anyone on either side: partisans ran wild; accusations flew like migrating bats. But after a while all the stupid jokes and rank hatred got tedious. Ken Starr was boring. “It’s just about sex” was incredibly boring. The whole sordid mess seriously damaged the country, but few actually realized what was really going on. While we Americans were wallowing in voyeurism, al Qaeda was killing people overseas and planning greater massacres. Most of us, even in the corridors of power, barely noticed.
Clinton associates have told me that the President often watches the Factor. If it’s true, I’m glad, and I tell those people to inform the President that he is far more powerful and knowledgeable than I am. Therefore, he should demonstrate that by coming on my program and setting me straight on a number of important issues. If his wife can do it, he can.
President Gerald Ford
Believe me, I tried hard to get President Ford to talk about the impeachment of President Clinton. In phone calls and letters, I tried in every way to get the man on the record about the action. He simply would not offer an opinion.
In a series of
interviews conducted for Parade magazine (the most widely read weekly publication in the world), I asked President Ford scores of questions about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. At that time, in the fall of 1997, the Clinton scandal was red-hot. Ford was candid on everything but Clinton, telling me that the rules of the “fraternity of former presidents” forbade him to criticize the current chief executive. Since then, both Bill Clinton and especially Jimmy Carter have hammered President Bush hard, so I guess the frat rules have changed for some people.
Anyway, in our chats, I found President Ford to be a nice guy. He did, however, get a bit angry over the fact that his administration has not been praised more. He pointed to the 1975 Helsinki Accords, which stopped Soviet military intrusions in Eastern Europe. Also, he was proud of his work in undermining the South African apartheid system.
The only time President Ford actually got huffy was when I asked about the Richard Nixon pardon. Clearly, he felt he lost the 1976 election to Jimmy Carter because he let Nixon skate on the Watergate mess. But Ford was adamant that he had made the correct decision, saying he had to stop the hatred because it was damaging America. I believe he was right.
I enjoyed talking with President Ford, who, I think, was stimulated by the conversations as well. No question in my mind that he enjoyed his power and status, first as House Speaker, then as president, finally as elder statesman. If we look back on his career, the man tried to do right by his country. He was no visionary or crusader, but he was a patriot.
Gerald Ford, like many presidents, came from a modest background, but once he left the Oval Office, he did not hesitate to amass a fortune by serving on corporate boards and earning enormous speaking fees. As his 2007 tax returns prove, Bill Clinton has done exactly the same thing. Is there anything wrong with that? You make the call.
President Jimmy Carter
It is safe to say that Jimmy Carter has used some of his power to avoid talking to me. About anything. He’ll talk with Hamas killers, thereby legitimizing them in the eyes of some folks, but forget about conversing with the bold, fresh guy. I do take this personally.
Over the years, we’ve invited Mr. Carter on the Factor dozens of times, but his “people” barely returned our calls. When they did deign to, I believe there was some sneering going on. This despite the fact that President Carter seems to write a book every three weeks and will appear on cooking shows to promote his work. So there is no question in my mind that Carter does not “get” the bold, fresh guy (whose program sells tons of books for smart authors). Or maybe he does understand and simply despises me. That has been known to happen.
To be fair, President Carter is smart to avoid me, because I think he was a disaster as president. I think he’s an okay guy, building those houses for Habitat for Humanity and such, but as the leader of America, the guy was scary.
It all crystallized for me at the 2004 Democratic Convention in Boston. There were President Carter and his wife, Rosalynn, sitting next to Michael Moore, the notorious America basher. The Carters were beaming as TV cameras caught them yukking it up with the rotund provocateur. I mean, think about it: there sat the powerful Jimmy Carter giving his ex-presidential seal of approval to Moore, a man who thinks Fidel Castro is the greatest.
Okay.
There is little more for me to say about Carter. During the hostage crisis, Iran made him look like Little Bo Peep, and on his watch, Americans had to line up for hours to get gas for their cars. Richard Nixon might have been a liar and a crook, but at least he had a clue about the real world and how it works. Carter was given power by the American people and rewarded their judgment by finishing his term looking like Swee’Pea from the Popeye comics. Some guys just can’t handle life in the power lane. That was Carter.
Oprah
Okay, it’s not even close: Oprah Winfrey is the most powerful woman in the world. Sorry, Hillary. Born into deep poverty in 1954, this woman makes Bill Clinton look like Prince Charles in the humble-beginnings department. Compared to her upbringing in Mississippi, I was raised in the Taj Mahal. And even worse, Ms. Winfrey recalls being molested as a child by several male relatives and friends of her family.
Add it all up and Oprah’s climb to the top of the power mountain is simply stunning. No other word for it. So what does this say about America, Michael Moore?
What kind of power does Oprah wield? Well, Parade magazine reports that she makes $260 million a year. That’s about one million bucks for every day she actually works. Wow.
Basically, earning that kind of money means that Oprah Winfrey can do or buy anything she wants on this earth as long as it’s legal and for sale. Like Lola in Damn Yankees!, whatever Oprah wants, Oprah gets. Think about that. There are no material limits for Oprah, nothing she cannot afford. Are you still thinking? Does Oprah’s situation sound good? Okay, here’s the downside: having that kind of money can literally drive a person crazy.
Here’s why…Remember those glittering Christmas mornings when you were a kid? Mine were thrilling, the highlights of my childhood. The anticipation of getting fun stuff makes most kids happy for weeks. That’s why Christmas is magic. Most children experience true joy during that season.
But it was the anticipation, the rarity of the experience that conjured up the magic. If, like Oprah, you can have Christmas every day of the year, there isn’t much anticipation, is there? I mean, the thrill of obtaining something exceptional, or unexpected, or long awaited, just doesn’t exist. With everything almost instantly available, everything becomes rather ordinary. For that reason, the ultrawealthy, if they are not ultracareful, can become bored, jaded, or, even worse, sadistic or self-destructive. The awful behavior of some celebrities and power brokers illustrates that point beyond a reasonable doubt. Just ask Caligula.
To me, the most interesting part of life is achieving goals and overcoming challenges. If all goals are met and there are no challenges, life can become tedious. That’s what Alexander the Great (the bored?) meant by whining, in his early thirties, that there were no more worlds to conquer. The opportunity to experience the most unexpected and best challenges is what gets most human beings up in the morning.
Also, with most of the world struggling in some way, it is not unusual for the very rich to feel very guilty about their material prosperity. “Why do I deserve all that comfort?” Along with tedium, that kind of subliminal guilt can consume a person and cause great unhappiness, which is why we see so many self-inflicted wounds among rich folks. Elvis, Ernest Hemingway, Marilyn Monroe, Kurt Cobain, people like that had a lot going for them. Yet, somehow, they chose to destroy themselves. All the fame and money weren’t enough.
But back to Oprah. We know each other slightly. For a while, we both worked for King World, a television syndication company, and our paths occasionally crossed. Years later, while promoting Culture Warrior, I did a “town meeting” on her Chicago-based talk show. I enjoyed it. Oprah challenged me but also listened to what I had to say. Unlike most in show business, Oprah has been very fair to me.
Because I know people who have worked with her, I have a pretty good idea how Oprah wields her enormous power. From the jump, she’s been smart. Anticipating that some people would try to extort money from her, a very common occurrence in the world of the wealthy, she requires employees to sign a “nondisparagement” and confidentiality agreement. Bad-mouth Oprah, you’re in court.
In addition, her lawyers are superaggressive in protecting her brand. Use clips of her show without permission, you’re in court. I admire how Oprah has used her power to protect herself and her operations. She’s shrewd and tough. That’s a compliment.
But even Oprah can’t derail the tabloid train, so she simply ignores it. Another smart move. Very rarely will you see Ms. Winfrey comment on anything or even consent to be interviewed. Like most truly powerful people, she controls her environment. Good for her.
Most important, she uses her power to help children, and this is where she sets herself apart from most o
ther moguls. In addition to giving millions to help poor and abused kids, Oprah uses her program to encourage society to aggressively protect endangered children. As I write, it is reported that her Angel Network has raised more than $51 million for such causes as Hurricane Katrina relief and educating poor girls in South Africa. Obviously, this is how power should be used—to aid those who are most vulnerable to harm and least able to help themselves.
Oprah’s program is seen in more than a hundred and thirty countries and continues to dominate American daytime TV. So, if Oprah likes a book, it becomes a best seller. If Oprah likes a recipe, that’s what you might be having for dinner. It’s a small world, after all, and Oprah is calling some serious shots all around the globe.
Yet in order to remain the most powerful woman in the world, Ms. Winfrey has to be careful. Her endorsement of Senator Barack Obama greatly helped him, no question. But it may not have helped her. Millions of Hillary Clinton supporters as well as many Republicans were not so thrilled when Oprah decided to become a political force. After she rallied for Obama, some polls actually showed Ms. Winfrey losing popularity among the folks. Americans are funny like that; they often admire the successful, but they don’t want anyone becoming too powerful. That might be the message for Oprah as far as the political arena is concerned.
Nevertheless, I continue to admire what Oprah has chosen to do with her power. When in 2007 a scandal broke out about alleged sexual abuse at the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls, the $40-million school she built near Johannesburg in South Africa, I defended her. While some in the press used the opportunity to cheap-shot Ms. Winfrey, my analysis simply stated that the woman couldn’t possibly control the actions of every employee she hires. Those of us who do have power well understand the old adage “No good deed goes unpunished.” In South Africa, Oprah tried to do a good thing. Give her a break.