I would have expected Laura Bush's new memoir Spoken from the Heart to be a full-throated defense of her husbands failed presidency. But I have to admit I didn't expect she would try to deflect blamefor the disastrous invasion of Iraq in pursuit of fictitious WMDs onto one of the fiercest critics of Bush's war dreams:
The usually charitable Mrs. Bush chastises the Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for their "nasty personal criticisms of George," and she writes that she has often wondered if Jacques Chirac of France or Gerhard Schröder of Germany "could have done more" to prevent the Iraq war, "if one of them could have persuaded Saddam to go into exile, if they could have conveyed that the United States was not bluffing."
So Schröder, who, along with Joschka ("I am not convinced") Fischer, warned that invading Iraq would be a huge strategic mistake, is to blame for the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld folly that have cost hundreds of thousands of lives and cost US taxpayers and their grandchildren (up to now) $750 billion.
Is this another example of the "epistemic closure" - ie stupid thinking - that characterizes "conservative commentary" in the US today?
Elsewhere in the book - which I am not likely to read - Mrs Bush has delusional fantasies that she and her husband were "poisoned"in Germany:
Former first lady Laura Bush writes in her forthcoming autobiography that she and her husband George W. Bush may have been poisoned when they became ill at a summit in Germany in 2007, the New York Times reported Wednesday.
Writing in her book "Spoken from the Heart," due to be released in May, Laura Bush says that the US Secret Service probed whether the presidential delegation may have been poisoned at the G8 summit
Perhaps the biological WMDs were not in Iraq after all, but rather in Heiligendamm?