William Kristol wrote a excellent editorial for the Washington Post yesterday about Bush and his legacy. He brings up many of the same points I have made over and over again on this blog about Bush. He will go down as a great President.
He invigorated the economy to new highs after 9/11 and the dot com bubble burst, his policies and actions have prevented another terrorist attack on this soil since 9/11 – an attack which many people thought was a foregone conclusion, he placed two great conservative justices on the Supreme Court, and he was the first President since the dawn of modern terrorism to actually call this war a war. Not even Reagan did that. He not only called it a war but he put us on a war footing, took out a brutal tyrant and freed 25 million Iraqi’s and millions inside Afghanistan.
Let’s look at the broad forest rather than the often unlovely trees. What do we see? First, no second terrorist attack on U.S. soil — not something we could have taken for granted. Second, a strong economy — also something that wasn’t inevitable.
And third, and most important, a war in Iraq that has been very difficult, but where — despite some confusion engendered by an almost meaningless "benchmark" report last week — we now seem to be on course to a successful outcome.
On the economy:
After the bursting of the dot-com bubble, followed by the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, we’ve had more than five years of steady growth, low unemployment and a stock market recovery. Did this just happen? No. Bush pushed through the tax cuts of 2001 and especially 2003 by arguing that they would produce growth. His opponents predicted dire consequences. But the president was overwhelmingly right. Even the budget deficit, the most universally criticized consequence of the tax cuts, is coming down and is lower than it was when the 2003 supply-side tax cuts were passed.
On Iraq:
First of all, we would have to compare the situation in Iraq now, with all its difficulties and all the administration’s mistakes, with what it would be if we hadn’t gone in. Saddam Hussein would be alive and in power and, I dare say, victorious, with the United States (and the United Nations) by now having backed off sanctions and the no-fly zone. He might well have restarted his nuclear program, and his connections with al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups would be intact or revived and even strengthened.
Still, that’s speculative, and the losses and costs of the war are real. Bush is a war president, and war presidents are judged by whether they win or lose their war. So to be a successful president, Bush has to win in Iraq.
Which I now think we can. Indeed, I think we will. In late 2006, I didn’t think we would win, as Bush stuck with the failed Rumsfeld-Abizaid-Casey strategy of "standing down" as the Iraqis were able to "stand up," based on the mistaken theory that if we had a "small footprint" in Iraq, we’d be more successful. With the new counterinsurgency strategy announced on Jan. 10, backed up by the troop "surge," I think the odds are finally better than 50-50 that we will prevail. We are routing al-Qaeda in Iraq, we are beginning to curb the Iranian-backed sectarian Shiite militias and we are increasingly able to protect more of the Iraqi population.
If we sustain the surge for a year and continue to train Iraqi troops effectively, we can probably begin to draw down in mid- to late 2008. The fact is that military progress on the ground in Iraq in the past few months has been greater than even surge proponents like me expected, and political progress is beginning to follow. Iran is a problem, and we will have to do more to curb Tehran’s meddling — but we can. So if we keep our nerve here at home, we have a good shot at achieving a real, though messy, victory in Iraq.
I have no doubt Bush will stay the course with his Grant, Gen. Petraeus, and allow this great General to win this thing. Now will conservatives allow us to win? That’s the question.
Many conservatives are down on Bush due to the immigration issue. You know, that issue that’s been around for 30+ years and the issue Reagan couldn’t fix. The fact that Bush has had the same message on immigration since before 2000 matters not to some, memory loss I suppose. But the base won that fight and now the base needs to stop being so damn fixated on a single issue and see the big picture here. That big picture being the war that was declared on us almost 30 years ago and we are finally fighting back.
The economy is another mosaic inside that big picture, and he has not waffled in his belief that tax cuts are what drive this economy.
Conservative justices on the federal bench is another piece of that picture.
There are many mosaics inside this picture and it’s should be remembered.
Lastly, one big reason why I believe Bush will go down as a great one is because he was the kind of President that we rarely see. One who does not govern by polls but instead governs by his heart. One who believes in the decisions he makes and does not waffle when bad polls come in.
UPDATE
The Anchoress wrote an excellent post last month about the immigration fracas that was going on and directed it towards those conservative who felt betrayed by him. While it was written about the immigration issue many of her points on what Bush has done is relevant for this post so here it is:
Betrayal is such a strong word; did he betray you, really?
- Did he protect us from the reach & province of the International Criminal Court? Yes.
- Did he keep us from the Kyoto mess that is currently tying up Europe? Yes.
- Did he create a workable alternative to Kyoto that other countries have embraced? Yes. Bet you didn’t know that!
- Have US Carbon Emissions decreased on his watch, without Kyoto? Yes.
- Did he submit a comprehensive energy plan that got killed by a weak congress? Yes.
- Has he lowered the deficit ahead of schedule in time of war? Yes. Even the NYTimes admits it!
- Did he cut taxes? Twice? Yes. And yes.
- Did he try to get the cuts made permanent? Yes. Congress dropped that ball.
- Did he stop government funding of EMBRYONIC stem cell research? Yes.
- Has he kept the promises he made as he held a dead cop’s shield before the Joint Houses? Yes.
- Did he go after the Taliban and AlQaeda in Afghanistan barely a month after 9/11? Yes.
- Has he been unflagging in his efforts to subdue terrorism, worldwide? Yes.
- Has be been the consistent voice for human liberty around the globe? Yes.
- After some serious missteps, is the surge working? Yes.
- Has he been a staunch friend to Israel, the only stable democracy in a frantic region? Yes.
- Did he end the farce of world-wide Arafat admiration? Yes
- Did he remove Saddam Hussein, whose state supported terrorists, from power? Yes.
- Did he invade Iraq at a time when the whole world believed Saddam had and “would use” WMD? Yes.
- Did he bring a much-maligned coalition with him? Yes. Some are still there.
- Did he liberate 50,000 people in keeping with the ideals of the 1998 Iraqi Liberation Act? Yes.
- Has he inspired the Iraqi people to finally believe enough in freedom to fight AlQaeda with us? YES!
- Has he figured out that a free and engaged Middle East makes America safer? Yes.
- Has he kept you safe since 9/11? So safe that you’ve almost forgotten to fear? Yes.
- Did he remove “the wall” between the CIA and the FBI? Yes.
- Did he go to the UN before invading Iraq? Yes.
- Did he tell the UN that the US would never ask permission to defend herself? Yes.
- Did he inspire Libya to surrender it’s WMD without firing a shot? Yes.
- Did he appoint excellent SCOTUS and Federal Judges to the bench? Yes.
- Did he implement the NSA terrorist eavesdropping program? Yes.
- Did he immediately move to freeze assets and make terror funding more difficult? Yes.
- Did he reform Medicare? Yes.
- Did he reform Social Security to give you more power over your money? He tried. See Congress.
- Did he manage an economy thru recession, terror attack & war w/ consistent gains for over ten quarters? Yes.
- Has he kept unemployment between 5.5% and 4.4% for an impressive period? Yes.
- Does he say what he means and mean what he says? Yes.
- Did he try to address immigration last year, when the houses in his party? Yes.
- Does he support the second amendment? Yes.
- Does he support school vouchers and school choice? Yes.
- Did he sign the ban on Partial Birth Abortion? Yes. It went to court, but he signed it.
- Did he reverse Clinton’s intent to kill Reagan’s pro-life Mexico policy? Yes.
- Did he support the Defense of Marriage Act? Yes. That used to be vitally important to you.
- Did he expand the roles of faith-based organizations in social programs? Yes.
- Did he prosecute the white-collar criminals like Ken Lay who ran riot through the ‘90’s? Yes.
- Has he handled himself with enormous courage, dignity and grace in the face of world/media/hate?
- Is he a man with a creed before he’s anything else? Yes.
- Did he establish Health Savings accounts? Yes.
- Did he have the Border Patrol installing monitoring devices along the borders? Yes.
- Has he made mistakes? Yes. Some undeniable beauts.
- Has he been an imperfect president? Yes.
- Has he spent too much? Probably.
- Has he given you most of what you’ve wanted? Actually, looking at the list…yes!
- Has he dared to disagree with anyone to keep his principles, even you? Yes.
Has he really been your Judas? Has he really betrayed you?
What she said.
I don’t think the immigration defeat will damage President Bush when it comes to Iraq. Immigration while a National Security issue was largely domestic.
Despite our need to tackle border security, it’s an issue we still have some time (not much) to solve.
But a defeat in Iraq would have huge consequences for a generation to come.
Democrats would use defeat to totally handcuff our military. It’s unlikely they would support ANY U.S. military action except the meals on wheels type of missions of which they are so fond.
We would be forced back on defense and have nowhere to go except the John Kerry model of handling terrorism as if it was a police matter.
Of course we all know what happened when we tried that failed strategy in the past (reminder for any lurking trolls: it’s called 9/11).
I’m glad Bill Kristol wrote this piece. If there were more reminders of the good things the Bush presidency has done our conservative friends might not be so discouraged and willing to toss Bush over the side.
I just posted on the same article, great minds think alike. I will link to this.
Great post.
This simply needs to be stated over and over again. Conservatives need to remember this President chose to deal with two of biggest problems Reagan chose not to confront – immigration and terrorism.
Now, let’s see whether historians will recognize Bush 43′s greatness with the passage of time.
Well I guess you could say giving amnesty to 12-20 million illegal aliens counts as “confronting” immigration. I don’t.
I’ve hung with Bush for a long time now, but my patience is at the end.
I think his legacy will be more about things like Harriet Meyers, Michael Chertoff, shamnesty, etc.
I’m beginning to think that Bush is as incompetent as the lefty’s say he is…
Signed,
Not a big fan anymore
P.S. David, I think you need to go back and look at Reagan’s record on terrorism. IIRC, it was pretty good. Look up things like “Libya airstrike” and “Achillo Laure” to start with.
Someone not long ago mentioned the results of the “Millennium’ account that President Bush established and what it has done of Africa and other nations. It is huge, Mongolia talked about it the other day and what it has done for that country. So add the “Millennium” account to the list of accomplishments.
The immigration thing kinda killed it for me. But I’ve no doubt that in 20+ years he’ll be seen in a much more positive light. Especially if the left get’s elected into office. In that case he’ll be seen as a saint in no time.
Joe, blog author at Guardian Watchblog, wrote numerous essays on this same topic over the years since the successful liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq, and has boiled down the idea into this quote:
Number of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships by precision use of American military force under George W. Bush:
50 million in just two years
Number of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships by anti-American Bush-bashing terrorist-appeasing whining elitists:
Zero. Ever.
Puts it all into perspective…as long as you don’t suffer from LCDD.
Signed,
Not a big fan anymore
Bronze, I get the feeling you never were a ‘big fan’ of our president, George W. Bush, to begin with.
Especially if the left get’s elected into office.
Isn’t that what happened in the 06 election? When people, such as Jenn, complain about what America has become, my response will be – Did you vote in ’06? Did you ‘teach the Republicans a lesson’ by staying home?
Then you got what you wanted.
Skye,
I wouldn’t be playing the Lotto anytime soon, if I were you, judging on your “feeling”.
In other words: you’re wrong.
Curt,
I just took the time to read this tonight in its entirety and you and I think so much alike. I couldn’t say it any better than you have here.
Skye,
I am totally going to use your quote from Guardian watchblog on the radio show tomorrow.
Re: “One who does not govern by pollsâ€Â
The polls are one of the reason he invaded Iraq. The admin thought it would be a cake walk, and parades at home just before the 04 elections. And if things went sour smart people(Rove) new most Americans distaste throwing a prez out during wartime.
This has me scratching my head Bronze. Your patience? How in the world did you not know Bush’s policies when it came to immigration all the way back to 2000. I knew them, he has always been soft on illegal immigration…even when he was in office in Texas. So this is the kind of statement that perplexes me.
I hate his stand on immigration but I am not, nor will I ever, be a one policy voter/supporter. Meaning those who say that because he does not agree with them on ONE issue then he is dead to them….
There are many important issues in this world, immigration is just one of dozens of them.
Dee, great minds think alike =)
Curt,
Immigration is only one of the reasons…
What a bonehead statement.
Explain why he isn’t bringing the troops home now then when the polls say he should? What your saying is he would use polls before as an excuse to invade but not know when the 2008 election is on the line?
Sigh….
Please go back to your crayons and leave the thinking to the adults.
The others?
I felt Bush was the lesser of two evils. He didn’t disappoint.
His suicidal public relation efforts or non-efforts have eroded support for the War and probably cost control of the House and Senate for Republicans. One example, firing Rumsfeld immediately after the election. Gain no points for the election but look weak in the face of the newly elected Democrats. Brilliant.
His too little, too late, & too quiet response to Abu Garib, Koran Flushing, Wiretapping, etc, etc, etc, etc. also hurt morale for the War and Republicans in the last election. He has avenues to talk. He may be no Reagan and can’t pierce the MSM Freeze out, but Reagan also didn’t have Conservative Talk Radio and the Internet.
The Surge was also too late to help morale on the homefront. If he did that before Nov. ’06 the outcome could have been quite different.
The troops had the rules of engagement ruled back for the Surge. Great. Why were they there in the first place?
The troop also need legal defense funds these days. Nice sticking up for them Commander in Chief.
Immigration. He sided against over 80% of the public. And he was on a side that couldn’t just lose gracefully tried to ram it down our throats.
Big Spender. He’s a perfect match for 80′s Democrats. Tax Cuts are OK as long as the Government can Spend Big. Fortunately the laffer curve is more sensitive than it would seem or we’ve been a little lucky anytime taxcuts have been implemented. And for me, they seem more like a freeze overall than a cut.
He does have good points and responding to the Terrorist and also removing Saddam will probably prove out in history. But he’s a mixed bag at best.
So what you are trying to grok about is that you supported President Bush before you decided to not support President Bush.
Where have I heard this BS before…
Kerry
And now the hildebeast is following his lead…
Clinton
Game over, thanks for playing
——————————–
I wouldn’t be playing the Lotto anytime soon, if I were you, judging on your “feeling”.
In other words: you’re wrong
Well, at least you conceded President Bush had SOME redeeming values. Although, you could have came to the same conclusion about Reagan in 1989. Hindsight does wonders to an icon.
Overall, President Bush’s record is frakking brilliant!
——————————-
He does have good points and responding to the Terrorist and also removing Saddam will probably prove out in history.
I’ll just cut-and-paste my comment yesterday, at Burkean Reflections and Dee’s blog:
I roll my eyes whenever I hear someone mention that “this is the worst president in history”. We won’t know the ripples in the pond for many years to come.
Even now, historians constantly re-evaluate the significance and worth of past presidents, with previously unfavorable ones, making unpopular decisions at the time, being looked back upon, as strong leaders, healthy for the direction our country took.
The very fact that President Bush has faced so much opposition and vitriol during his tenure, makes me admire him, on a personal level, all the more.
He has definitely left his mark upon the world, taking risks and trying to accomplish big things. He even tried to tackle social security reform, rather than kick it down the road for the next president to sweep it under the rug.
Leaders need to be strong enough to lead, making right decisions, even when they aren’t popular decisions.
Politicians who are easily swayed by opinion polls and go with whichever way the wind blows, irk me, to no end.
Donald Lambro wrote a nice piece, recently on the possible legacy of the Bush Presidency.
I am proud of my President. So many conservatives are angry at him. At the moment, it is easy to “jump on the bandwagon” and pile on. But the President has remained steadfast on “the War”, and I will remain steadfast in my loyalty to him, keeping in mind that none of us will ever agree with an elected leader, 100% of the time.
I might be left frustrated on certain matters, regarding illegal immigration, as it pertains to This President. But I’m baffled at the “over-the-top” sense of betrayal from conservatives- the ones who are “all-or-nothing-at-all” angry-as-hell conservatives who don’t seem to get it, that sometimes, realistically, you don’t get everything you want, and have to achieve compromise, to move ahead.
The sense of betrayal from them is frustrating to me, because President Bush was ever up-front about his stance on immigration. He campaigned on it in 2000 and in 2004. So what were the alternatives? President Gore? President Kerry?
No, thank you. President Bush was and is, the right man, in the right place, at the right time in American history.
Your points on public relations are the common one thrown around by Conservatives which I do not agree with. The Administration has indeed tried to get their message out only to be drowned out by the MSM and the Shadow Party. Abu Gharib? What was he supposed to do? Beg for forgiveness?….he announced an investigation and then moved on….come on.
Are you kidding? Do you really believe the Dem’s and the MSM would be glowing about the progress in Iraq if the Surge had come earlier…..wow. Thing is, when the earlier strategy wasn’t working he did what any good leader does and finds someone who can lead with a new strategy. If we all have the benefit of hindsight it would be a perfect world but alas, we don’t.
Oh please. While it sucks that some troops were railroaded, plenty are not. They didn’t have a legal defense fund when I was in and they don’t now. They get representation and a chance to go to trial just like anyone else in this country. Your just digging for excuses now.
He was on that side in the 90′s also, funny how you didn’t know that in 2000 and 2004.
He is definitely a spender but I can live with that as long as he reduces our taxes.
My favorite part:
Well aren’t you swell for at least giving him that.
Sigh….
You’re wrong about Bush being the kind of president we “rarely” see. We’ve never seen anything like him. He is unique among presidents in many ways, most of which will result in a legacy of ruin and disgrace. The lesson to be learned is that the nation should try not to elect someone who refers to the Constitution as a “fucking piece of paper” or an anomalous character such as, say, a fellow born in the East who claims to be a Texan but who is afraid of horses.
An ignorant statement if I’ve ever seen one. Go back to KOS, the mothership is calling you home.
Re: “Explain why he isn’t bringing the troops home now then when the polls say he should?â€Â
Last time I checked he isn’t running for office. He doesn’t care about the GOP now that he doesn‘t need them. He cares about his legacy and has psychological issues concerning his father.
Oh, the legacy that all you lefties believe is in tatters because he is staying in Iraq? That legacy?
Btw, if he cared about polls then why didn’t he listen to the polls in March 2003 which said the US was divided on going to war with Iraq? A good Clintonite would of waffled like leaf, thankfully we had a great leader in office instead of pure politician like Clinton or Gore:
And there you go folks, another example of a leftist view of the world, narrowminded and extremely ignorant.
Re: “Oh, the legacy that all you lefties believe is in tatters because he is staying in Iraq? That legacy?â€Â
In the real world his legacy was tarnished awhile back for initiating action needlessly without complete preparation and or concern for the consequences. He was only preparing for and concerned about winning re-election/outdoing his dad. He and his minions gave estimates that would have had things wrapped up and troops coming home to victory parades in summer of 04. That was the point of my original post where I took issue with the claim that Bush was “One who does not govern by pollsâ€Â. His legacy is only getting worse by staying without total and complete war there and at home(some sacrifices). Because of his concern about legacy and the psychological issues concerning his father, he is “staying†because he doesn’t want to “lose Iraq†on his watch, which koolaid drinkers and Bush think his father did by not rolling into Bagdad in the early 90‘s. The statement, “father knows best†is accurate on this subject. Dad told him not to do it. But that “psychological issue†and 04 elections made him ignore good/experienced advice.
“why didn’t he listen to the polls in March 2003â€Â
Because he was more concerned about the polls in late summer/early fall of 04. That should have been obvious from my previous 2 posts.
“narrowminded and extremely ignorant.â€Â
That’s the usual self projection type accusation of a koolaid drinking Bush Cult Syndrome(BCS) victim when confronted with an unpleasant truth.
The insult score is 2 to 1 in your favor with you starting it and me not participating in my last reply. Are you going to continue this game?
Rofl….yeah, your real world is THE real world. Puhlease.
With polls showing a evenly divided country on Iraq are you that far into the leftist thought sewer that you cannot see the best thing for him to do to get re-elected was to just stay in Afghanistan? You can bet plenty of advice like that was thrown at him. Your pathetic attempts at explaining away your BDS is just that, pathetic.
Calling narrowminded and ignorant comments just that is not an insult, its just pointing out fact.
OF COURSE far-right wing “bomb middleeast” crowd is going to think Bush is the greatest president ever. You are just as bad as the far-left that think terrorism is some magical event that is made up for political gains. You need to look at certain things when you evaluate a president. Bush’s numbers are at NIXON levels here, and I’m pretty sure that while Nixon is not veiwed as ruining our country, he is less hated then he was when he resigned. Still, people know he was a crook, and corrupt. But all of you hard right wingers, think President Bush has done NOTHING wrong. Nothing! That the left has made everything up, from Katrina, to the struggles in Iraq, to Scooter Libby, etc. At some point, you have to realize Bush has worn out his welcome, and since this war in Iraq will be over in the next three years, and I doubt we can democratize Iraq by then, George Bush will be looked at as a failure.
Of course a lefty will come here to talk trash about Bush…BDS is rampant amongst you folks
Katrina, the fault of the Mayor and Governor of LA. Struggles in Iraq? War is not easy young jedi, maybe in the comic books you read but not in real life. The sign of a true leader is one who adapts and overcomes which is what is going on now. Libby? You mean the man who was railroaded for forgetting a date, the man who didn’t leak the CIA desk jockeys name first…you mean that guy? And Bush is responsible for that?
You guys really do need to find some meds for your condition.