Peggy Noonan makes many good points in her column, including the one about Webb. 

Ms. Noonan says Webb replied he wanted his son back. No, Webb said he wanted "THEM" back. That makes quite a difference in the rest of the so-called conversation.

I've heard several hoity-toity comments regretting that Webb later responded quite so curtly to Bush's response that "that wasn't what I asked you." Let's all remember with whom we're dealing here. First of all, the good ol' boy pose by GW was tin-eared when he asked about "your boy." That would be okay between two Southerners in a close community where the families all knew and grew up with each other (and everyone knew it, and knew the NAME of the offspring in question).  It is demeaning and deliberately so when posed by an arrogant little pissant trying to patronize a subordinate.

Bush may be rude, crude and often abusive toward his underlings and those whom he wishes to dominate; it's his technique, not necessarily an unlearned one, remember--- he is cunning and a will do anything underhanded to gain an advantage, however small the advantage or the occasion. It is instinctive with him, but I have a certain idea that Webb understood this very well--- and refused to play "the game," at least as Bush is accustomed to playing it on his terms. What a shock to the dumbo-in-office who has so demeaned his high office over 6 1/2 years. Disrespect for the Presidency? No. Disrespect for the occupant? Of course, and richly dserved.

I've seen a few posts defending Bush as just resorting to a Southernism in the "your boy" comment, but every Southerner knows that one never resorts to that type of familiarity unless invited to do so by long acquaintance or casual friendship around something in common like hunting, fishing, or bowling, whatever.  Coming from one in a position of authority to one he deems his subordinate (which you just know he does), then it's more akin to the Sheriff in Cool Hand Luke (come to think of it, one of Webb's favorite movies), trying to assert his authority over Luke (Paul Newman, he of the dreamy blue eyes). 

Lowell Feld is more of a Cool Hand Luke character without all of the existential emptiness (and I don't think he has blue eyes either). I'll sub in for the string shaking scene because Lowell isn't very good at it.  No shortage of wardens and the dude with reflective sunglasses.

And the A-team members are perfect as bloodhound handlers, except the dog isn't Ol' Blue, it's Ol' Red.

Anyway, that's my favorite movie, too, and to anyone who wants to argue with my casting, we can settle over boiled eggs. As for Jim Webb, he's writing his own script, and a few others, too :)

is a failuhe to communicate.

One of the best movie lines ever.

Another good line, "Luke, you got your mind right?"

What some have taken as an innocent pleasantry from Bush was clearly a loaded question, an unfriendly foot in the door. It was pushy, presumptuous, and manipulative. The Senator-Elect was fortunately alert to it and responded appropriately, indeed with some restraint. We did not elect a beagle to howl submissively when a president pulls his ear. We elected a watchdog who knows when to snarl.

how disrespectful to the office of the presedency has George Bush been????

Enough to make me pine for the good old days of Nixon and watergate!

a "blast"; more like a ladylike version of a Kabuki dance around the subject. She never comes out and says, outright, that it was *Bush* who behaved like an arrogant boor; all she does is, she lets Webb off that charge, while piously asking for more "grace" in Washington. True, given the source (Wall Street Journal), it's better than nothing (and, even, perhaps, somewhat surprising to see in the editorial pages) but, all the same... Pretty piss-poor defence of an erst-while colleague. And she never mentions Will *once*, even though the whole article is, quite obviously, a "response" of sorts.

One of Bush's conditions for debating Kerry was that the moderator could NOT point out that Bush did not answer the question. So no one was allowed to say to him that his meaningless irrelevant response "was not what I asked you."  Bush could parrot the "talking points" fed to him through the lump in his jacket, but the moderator could not point out that his talking points were irrelevant to the question.  I wish the programs would only let candidates show up if they would really answer the questions. If that meant Kerry appeared without Bush, even better. PBS, LWV and other groups should not be co-conspirators in this charade.

Bush won't answer questions, and he can't accept that Webb figured out how to outwit him with his answer.  No that it's hard to outwit him; just the Yes Men in his cabinet don't have the gonads to do it.

the hallmark of George W. Bush; his arrogance clouds any hope of perception of reality. It is difficult to believe that anyone could be so arrogant such that his ability to lead is compromised... call this the Caligula effect, and we get to witness it in present time here in hometown America where we are now bordering on the loss of nearly 3,000 young American lives in a war of manipulative choice which could throw America onto the defense in the International Court of Justice in the Hague.  Worst president ever??, that's begging the question; Bush should be in Dante's Nineth Circle of Hell for his squandering of America's good will, international power, let alone its once-upon-a-time budget surplus.  He has about 700 days left in office and those are far too many for such a dimwit.
  Bush should be required to have a wall of names of those Americans who died in Iraq in support of his false and immoral policy built on the grounds of his presidential library.  Such a wall of names, akin to the Vietnam Memorial would stand as a tribute if his foreign policy should succeed; and a tribute to his blind arrogance, if it fails.  It is obvious where I've put my money! ... but it is the least he can do for the American people at this point, considering that he has never attended a single funeral service for any who have died in his name and at his orders.