Mr. Bush conveyed a level of sanguinity with his unpopularity. Mr. Draper recalled that in their last meeting, in May, Mr. Bush pointed outside to his dog, Barney, and said, \ufffdThat guy who said if you want a friend in Washington get a dog, knew what he was talking about.\ufffd
He otherwise addressed his unpopularity as a tactical issue. For instance, in May he said that this fall it would be up to General Petraeus to convince the public that the Iraq strategy is working.
\ufffdI\ufffdve been here too long,\ufffd Mr. Bush said, according to Mr. Draper. \ufffdEvery time I start painting a rosy picture, it gets criticized and then it doesn\ufffdt make it on the news.\ufffd
But he said he saw his unpopularity as a natural result of his decision to pursue a strategy in which he believed. \ufffdI made a decision to lead,\ufffd he said, \ufffdOne, it makes you unpopular; two, it makes people accuse you of unilateral arrogance, and that may be true. But the fundamental question is, is the world better off as a result of your leadership?\ufffd
My answer to his question is a resounding no, the world is not better off as a result of his leadership. This is from a review of a book, [link|http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/washington/02book.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp|Dead Certain] , coming out on Tuesday by Robert Draper, who interestingly enough is the grandson of Leon Jaworski.