 |
| Rob's Soapbox | ||
January 20th, 2009 THE DOES AND DOESN'TS OF PRESIDENT BUSH It seems appropriate that the final Soapbox I ever write (I hope) about President George W. Bush be titled in a manner fitting with the way our 43rd president spoke. (Those of you that don’t understand the reference need to re-read the title. It isn’t the dos and don’ts…that’s how intelligent people speak). The point of the title and this space is to attempt to put into context the events of the past eight years under the presidency that some call the worst in history. As I have written extensively prior, it is patently impossible to make such claims to Bush’s ineptness in real time. No president can be accurately and objectively judged within a decade of leaving office. Historians able to leave their ideology at the door continue to elevate the presidential competency of such formerly vilified leaders as Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan while simultaneously deciding that presidents once thought to be amongst the greatest, such as FDR, Teddy Roosevelt and Bill Clinton, deserving of far less credit. How history judges Bush shall be left to events of the next few decades. With all presidents, however, there are attempts in real time to both vilify and assign credit to decisions made. In a nation more partisan and less objective than ever before in our history, it is comical to watch the Bush defenders take credit for things he deserves none for, while equally as amusing to watch the Bush haters condemn and/or ignore actual accomplishments of the past eight years. History will decide the ultimate fate of decisions such as the final outcome of our response to 9/11, the War in Iraq (which had nothing to do with 9/11…still), and the reaction to the economic collapse of the fall of 2008. It is fair, however, to assign and remove blame from the Bush presidency on a variety of things that he does and does not deserve credit for: Bush DOES NOT deserve credit for the surge in Iraq. This is the most maddening defense of President Bush offered up by his supporters; that he had the political courage to order a surge of troops into Iraq at a time when we were losing control of all of Mesopotamia. As promised, I will not offer up a defense or a condemnation of the initial decision to attack Iraq, I will leave that for history. However, had Bush been less arrogant and allowed himself to actually listen to military leaders at the time of the initial invasion (think: General Shinseki) we would have gone into Iraq with more than three times the number of troops Bush ultimately authorized, a force sizeable enough to have overwhelmed any thoughts of insurgency that followed. Giving Bush “credit” for the surge (an idea he didn’t even first publicly claim, postulate or embrace) is akin to offering up praise to a murderer who cleans the blood off of the walls before fleeing the scene of the crime (at least he had the decency to clean up after himself…). Had Bush done it right in the first place, the surge never would have been necessary. Bush DOES deserve some credit for America’s homeland not being attacked again since 9/11. Presidents throughout time have gotten credit and blame for positive things that they had very little do with. The economic boom of the 90s was no more Bill Clinton’s doing than was the Berlin wall coming down in any way associated to Bush the elder. Both of those events were inevitable and completely unrelated to the president in the office at the time. Bush, however, must get some credit for keeping America safe. While many will argue over the tactics used, the results are unarguable if not justified. Numerous plots have been foiled as a direct result of various policies Bush put in place. Scream from the highest mountain top that he has infringed on our rights and exerted power beyond his constitutional authority (both of which are probably true) but at least acknowledge the results. Let’s argue tomorrow about whether or not the ends justify the means. Bush both DOES and DOES NOT deserve blame for the economic meltdown. He does not deserve blame in the sense that the genesis of the problem did, in fact, begin decades ago with horrific policies enacted by Jimmy Carter (and allowed or extended by every president following) which literally handed homes to people who could never dream of paying for them. Bush DOES, however, deserve blame for not fixing the problem before it became what it did. Pointing to speeches and memos from 2002 and 2003, in which Bush warned of the imminent dangers of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and our overextended credit system is a joke. Bush supporters love to say “we tried to warn you,” yet they fail to mention three fairly important facts: 1. The Republicans controlled all of congress in 2002 and 2003 and could have passed legislation to begin confronting the imminent problem. 2. Had Bush not been distracted by the run up to invading Iraq perhaps he could have focused more on convincing congress to fix the situation. 3. Great leaders don’t just recognize problems before they occur; they demonstrate the ability and courage to solve them pre-eminently. How about a banner that reads “Mission Failed.” Bush DOES deserve credit for trying harder than any president ever has in Africa. This is probably the one true “shame” of the lack of credit given to Bush. Whether or not you agree with our tactics of throwing billions of dollars at a continent riddled with strife, famine, disease and corruption, there is no denying that Bush has done more to try to help Africa; from spending more money on AIDS prevention to drastically increasing our ability to aid them in ways not financial, it is truly sad to see Bush demonized rather than applauded for his attempts to heal that continent. If you are ignorant to the facts, look them up. The people of Africa revere Bush on a level they never reserved for any U.S. president and that is to be commended. Keep an eye on Libya, as well, a country that the Bush administration somehow scared seemingly straight (or at least less crooked than it was). The future leader of that nation, Qadhafi’s son, was just in America preaching free markets and democracy. If somehow that nation becomes the leading beacon of that region, a new day could finally dawn for the Dark Continent, and Bush would deserve more than a small portion of the credit. Bush DOES NOT deserve credit for the No Child Left Behind Act, an abomination of bi-partisanship. Throwing money at our schools and demanding that kids learn tests and not facts is no more helpful than pouring lighter fluid upon a California wildfire. Bush and his partner in crime, Ted Kennedy, were wrong headed, fiscally irresponsible and cowardly in championing the idea initially and they are equally pathetic in their current attempts to expand and/or take credit for the act today as some form of successful legislation. Bush DOES NOT deserve the scorn and blame he continues to receive as a result of Hurricane Katrina. As maddening as it is to watch Bush defenders claim that the surge was a brilliant piece of leadership on his part, it is equally infuriating to watch Bush haters continue to levy an inordinate amount of guilt upon Bush for the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Facts now confirm that almost everything reported in the 96 hours after Katrina made land was false; no one was raped in the Super Dome, sharks and alligators never swam in the flood waters of the 9th ward and 10,000+ people did not die (in fact the total death toll stands below 1,500). Similarly, the alleged lack of response by the Federal government was and is a fallacy. Bush’s total ineptness as a communicator allowed him to be defined by the hysteria of the moment. Despite facts to the contrary now, Bush is still held solely accountable for the pictures of African Americans stranded on roofs; the true blame for those images rest at the feet of the corrupt and idiotic mayor of New Orleans and more corrupt governor of Louisiana, as well as the foolishness of the people who chose not to evacuate. Documents have proven that the Bush administration had everything ready to go in the proper time frame but that the wizards of smart running the city and state refused and delayed their end of leadership. No doubt that Bush botched things in the hours afterwards, but not recognizing where the true blame lies is appalling. Bush DOES deserve credit for appointing stunningly conservative Supreme Court justices. Elections have consequences. Clinton did what he said he would and put one of the most liberal judges in the history of the court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, on the bench; that was a consequence of his election(s). Bush did what his father (David Souter) and Reagan (Sandra Day O Conner) failed to do; he appointed two far right conservative men to the bench in John Roberts and Samuel Alito. You can oppose and hate such appointments as much as you like, but in this one case, Bush did exactly what he said he would do and proved that elections have far reaching and lasting consequences. Bush DOES deserve criticism and scorn for using 9/11 as a justification for going back on his pre-election pledge of never again allowing America to become a country of nation builders. Bush’s constant claims that “9/11 changed everything,” are as unimpressive as people who completely abandon their own personal ideals once they have children and allow their kids to run roughshod over them claiming all along that they never understood until they had children how hard it was to raise them. Cop-outs and excuses all. If 9/11 did change everything, than Bush was never actually committed to his vision and ideals. Give it a rest. Similarly, Bush DOES deserve complete and total condemnation for his fiscally irresponsible spending policies. The two political parties are totally indistinguishable now as it relates to wasting money. Guessing Bush’s most important, longest lasting decision is a popular parlor game amongst political pundits and those of us who discuss such things with friends. My nomination is one that is never mentioned; Bush DOES deserve a mountain of credit for refusing to enact the Kyoto global warming accord of 2001. Had he done so, it is impossible to overstate how much worse off the world would be economically. Despite the devastating legacy of mandated ethanol production, which single handedly plummeted the world into a global recession and food shortage, the environmental lobby continues to insist on policies that bring with them no proof of helping the Earth or the environment, but with an un-arguable track record of destroying economic growth and entire cultures (have a chat with Mexico when you get a chance about their corn prices sky rocketing, sending them into total economic despair and on the brink of total collapse as a nation). Often times, things Presidents refuse to do wind up being the most positively impactful. Here’s hoping we never actually find out how awful life would be under such asinine rules and restrictions as were found in the never ratified Kyoto accord. Finally, Bush DOES deserve credit for a classy, seamless transition with incoming president Barack Obama. People who fail to give him credit for this are petty and small. Such transitions have rarely gone as smoothly and impressively as this one, a testament to both our system and to the Bush team’s commitment to going out in style. He’s accomplished very little of note that’s been positive in his 8 years, can’t we at least give him this one?
|
||