If vindication means anything its name is spelled George Bush.
As former U.S. president George W. Bush spoke to a Saskatoon audience, I stood in the wings, sneaking a peek through the curtains at the spectators beyond the footlights.
The crowd was friendly to be sure. But more than that, the relationship was like a musical virtuoso carrying the audience through every nuance, crescendo and dynamic of a composition.
With every pause, smile, laugh and down stroke of seriousness, Bush had the crowd in his hand.
Before the show, a friend who recently dined with the former Texas governor and two-term president put it bluntly: "Whatever you think you're going to see with this guy -- good or bad -- your reaction will be anywhere from pleasantly surprised to completely blown away."
Bush was open, charming, humble and self-deprecating. But as he spoke, the internal voice asked: "How is this guy the same evil manipulator who 'stole' the 2000 election from poor Al Gore?"
As the 43rd president talked about events and decision-making, accountability and principles -- not only within political life but also within ourselves -- he was passionate and uncompromising.
As Bush spoke of families held together by love, of HIV-AIDS projects in Africa and of educational reform designed to raise up the most vulnerable of children, was this the same moron, the dark and shifty war criminal we've been treated to in the mainstream media?
How could this be the same bumbling klutz, the man-child of spoonerisms that the smarmy David Letterman mocked on television every night?
As the president spoke of regrets, the intelligence reports and legal options open to fight an enemy that had declared war on America, where was this one-dimensional warmongering puppet so demonized by filmmaker Michael Moore and the truthers and haters on the Internet?
Was this guy on stage talking about dissidents, free speech and opening Middle Eastern dialogue through a commitment to free elections and democracy really the same shallow ideologue that the editorial boards of major U.S. newspapers, CNN, NBC and CBS told us he was?
My impression -- both from a couple of personal conversations with Bush and hearing him speak -- was that this is an essentially decent man with more charisma than any rock star will ever have.
While the media can do some creative editing and taking out of context, the cartoon-like George Bush of modern hate culture can't simply be made up. So how can this be the same man? Easy.
Speaking style is one thing. A passionate and articulate speaker, Bush lacks the natural eloquence and polish of a Bill Clinton.
Having now spent time with both former presidents, Clinton has an almost supernaturally smooth, flawless ad-libbed delivery and the ability -- on the fly and without a note -- to weave in often abstruse concepts alongside the banal and make it all sound like poetry.
Bush is an engaging speaker but more lineal and direct. And occasionally he stumbles. In 90 minutes Bush tripped twice -- once referring to the "universality of freedom" as the "university of freedom." Another stumble had him invert idealistic and ideologue.
Clinton doesn't do this. He can make a take-out menu sound like the Magna Carta. The problem is when Clinton's done and you reflect on his words, it's still a menu.
Bush's speech was much more memorable for the audience. But the hate-bloggers and YouTube gang can clip three seconds of the Bush stumbles and the story repeats itself.
Bush also has a directness of speech -- unlike the circuitous Clinton delivery -- that comes to a point, often abruptly. When you hear the premise, argument and reasoning, the blunt point is very effective. But the point, taken alone, can make the speaker -- particularly when he is George Bush -- sound simple.
And, seeming not to care that it'll end up in the hands of his enemies, Bush pokes fun at himself with the cleverness, edge and abandon of good standup comedy. As he unloads hilarious quips about how hated or dumb he is, Bush plays into the hands of detractors by actually repeating many of the same things they've said about him.
As people filed out after Bush's speech there were as many "wows" and glowing adjectives as at a Michael Buble concert -- and that's a lot.
Most telling was the early 20s woman who looked shocked, visibly open-mouthed, as she confessed how confused she was by what she had expected and how impressed she was by the experience.
For those who either admired president Bush throughout his term or thought there was something more substantive underneath the hatchet jobs of Hollywood and the Beltway, vindication is a good word. Things aren't always as they seem. You were right all along about George W. Bush.
