The Big Questions That "History" Will Ask

Jacob Weisberg asks them in Slate:

To what extent was Bush himself really the driver of his central decisions? How engaged or disengaged was he? Why, after governing as a successful moderate in Texas, did he adopt such an ideological and polarizing style as president? Why did he politicize the fight against terrorism? Why did he choose to permit the torture of American detainees? Why did he wait so long to revise a failing strategy in Iraq?

To which we, in our simple, populist style, will add:

Just how gawd-damned far up his ass was his head? Did they want it to stay there? Is it still up there, or is it out, but so covered in shit that he still can't see anything?

The wrap-up from Weisberg:

It seems unlikely that the memoirs in the works from Rove and Rumsfeld will challenge Bush's repeated assertions that he was not only in charge but in control. As for the president himself, we're unlikely to get much: Bush has a poor memory and is too unreflective to have kept the kind of diary that would elucidate matters. In time, however, other accounts are sure to emerge. Congressional investigations will shed new light. Declassified documents and e-mails may paint a clearer picture.

Maybe, maybe not.