Saturday, January 17, 2009

Bush's legacy: two views

"Though a smaller band, Bush's defenders parry that he will look to history more like Harry Truman, a president whose achievements took decades to appreciate."
-Jonathan Rauch

"Even if you're a Republican, at this point you gotta admit, for eight goddamn years we've been watching a monkey fuck a football."
-Ron Bennington


Leland Purvis said...

No one is more relieved than me to see this dufus go. But, just to play devil's-advocate, I can think of one scenario which would lead to Bush being lauded by historians: If we get one or two big terrorist attacks in the US in the next year, Bush will be seen as having been a better defender of the homeland. The patriot act will be vindicated, etc, an nauseum.

Hell, they're making a hero out of Reagan. Making it sound like he 'defeated communism'. If they can turn Reagan into a poster-boy for anything but alzheimer's, they can turn the SHRUB into the proverbial burning-bush.

Anonymous said...

I don't think either view is accurate. The first hints at some vindication in the justness of Bush's actions; the other paints a picture of utter incompetence.

The fact is, the Bush Administration succeeded brilliantly in almost all its goals: centralization of power, strengthening of the executive, projection of military force, regime change, nationalization of the economy, militarization of the police. And managed win reelection. By its own measure, it was a huge success.

Such is the perversity of power.