Political Discussions
Bush's Legacy
Posted by NewBlogger2008 • 11/20/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: bush, history
Granted Bush is a very unpopular president. But I want people to be honest. What do you think his historical legacy will be? I do not mean overall, but on four basic points: foreign policy, economic policy, domestic policy, and personal character? Do you think history will judge him the way he has been judged today? I am not looking for more Bush hate (i.e. no, Bush is evil, the devil, worst person on the face of the earth stuff), but an honest answer whether positive or negative.
User Comments
-
I think the future will see Bush in much the same light as he is seen today. Maybe even worse. -
I don't think he'll ever be considered a great president. But i disagree with xmarks here. I think his presidency will be seen in a better light over time. Look at Clinton, who wasn't exactly the pinnacle of presidential composure in his day. And how he is seen now.
I also think that Obama's presidency will have a lot to do with it. The better he does, the less credit will be given to Bush over time. Should Obama fail miserably, Bush will automatically be seen in a better light.-
I agree with your second paragraph and would even cite it suggesting Bush's poor performance has helped build Clinton's legacy. Additionally, Clinton left the presidency with reasonable popularity and an improvement on balancing the budget.
-
-
Torture. Unilateral action in Iraq that destabilized international relations in ways we are still coming to grips with. Thousands of dead and wounded in this country. Hundreds of thousands in Iraq. The privatization of warfare. The politics of fear. Eight years' lost in which we could have made environmental and energy progress. The fraught No Child Left Behind program. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. A new generation of people who can't pronounce nuclear. A whole lot of political satire.
That's just what I know has happened. Looking forward, we might also talk about the lost years to produce a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. That window might be closing. We might also talk about the fate of the GOP, at least in the medium term. But only time will tell. -
foreign policy: miserable failure
economic policy: miserable failure
domestic policy: could care less about the environment or infrastructure
personal character: could care less about our country
Note: he could be judged even less favorably in the future if there are investigations into his administration after he leaves office. Much of what he's done to the country are reversible, though. The huge debt he's leaving is not.-
I think the whole "Investigate him after he is gone" will set a dangerous precedence.
If we start doing that, you can believe it will become the norm. And although it could reduce some corruption, you better believe it will significantly hamper the administration in office.
Just imagine it like this.
Every document and every decision Obama's administrations handles will be looked at with the intent of finding some way of suing the members of that administration.
No one is going to move a muscle until they know that their decision is watertight. OR they are going to make damn sure that their decisions and actions aren't traceable back to them.
In the end, you create 1. A situation where future administrations can't act or atleast can't act quickly, or 2. a more secretive administration with less insight.
I think that is a reason that this won't happen much. There isn't a more slippery slope out there. -
There's no statute of limitations for murder and war crimes. If there ARE no investigations, that would be worse for our country since it would show there are no consequences for presidents who commit high crimes and misdemeanors.
-
Suing and criminal investigations are also very different topics.
-
-
My opinion regarding how history will view Bush:
Foreign policy - he started two wars, one of which was based on faulty intelligence that wouldn't have held up in court. When the impetus for the war was proven a lie (not Bush's lie, the "source's" lie), Bush changed the impetus rather than admitting a mistake. The Bush Doctrine and Cheney's condescending remarks to "old Europe" following its pronouncement alienated our relationships with key allies and harmed our ability to project our political power in the process. Our efforts in Afghanistan are failing (according to prominent military personnel) because of our troop commitments in Iraq and, thus, we are in danger of losing two wars started under Bush's watch. The military and economic capital we are spending in Iraq has harmed our position as a unipolar superpower (perhaps irreversibly, only time will tell). Bush's trade and deficit spending policy has led us to become net debtor (in the hundreds of billions of dollars range) to our potential enemies. I'll stop here, but you get the point. I think historians will judge Bush quite harshly for these things.
Domestic policy - In the name of the "war on terror", Bush has clandestinely taken many civil liberties that we know about and possibly many more that we don't know about. His environmental policies have also been a net detriment to our environment in several ways. He also bungled miserably and quite unapologetically one of the biggest natural disasters in modern history (the aftermath of Katrina). I think historians will also judge Bush quite harshly for these policies.
Economic policy - He'll leave office having overseen the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression; a crisis that's more "global" in its implications than the Great Depression was. History normally blames those in office when crises strike. And, not that it was completely Bush's fault, but his tax, trade, monetary and regulatory policies helped. History will note that.
Personal character - I think history will remove malicious or deceptive intent from Bush. I'm sure he'll write a memoir explaining his genuine belief that his foreign, domestic and economic policies were in the national interest. Many historians will disagree with him on those points, but I'm sure that history will remember that Bush genuinely felt he was doing the right thing.-
My thoughts are along the same lines as opinionstreams. How Obama's presidency goes and what Bush does in his remaining years will also have an impact.
Also, I think Dick Cheney deserves a large portion of the blame for many of the problems of the administration. Bush may not have been so bad had he chosen a better V.P.
-
-
I for one would not be so quick to judge Bush. How he is viewed historically is going to be determined based on some future factors. Like csiunatic said, Bush's legacy will certainly depend on how Obama's presidency goes. Also the future of Iraq. If Iraq manages to pull itself together (which it seems to be doing) and becomes a successful country, that will certainly make a big impact for his legacy. Remember, Bush has had more to deal with in his 8 years than most presidents. Sept. 11, Iraq, terrorism, 2 major economic slow downs, Katrina, political scandals not of his own making, and the list goes on. So I for one would not be so quick to judge him.
-
If Iraq goes better, it will reflect better on Obama than on Bush. He still started the war on a faulty premise.
-
Remember, Bush has had more to deal with in his 8 years than most presidents. Sept. 11, Iraq, terrorism, 2 major economic slow downs, Katrina, political scandals not of his own making, and the list goes on. So I for one would not be so quick to judge him.
This shows that Bush is not a leader. A real leader would want to be president during challenging times. It provides opportunity for greatness. Bush used 9/11 to promote his political agenda. Katrina was a failure of leadership by his crony appointment of someone with no experience to head FEMA. The Attorney General scandal was absolutely his making. And the list goes on... -
In 60 years we've gone from "The Buck Stops Here" to "LEAVE BRITNEY/BUSH ALONE!"
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
