It is important that good people stop admiring Bush. If he was a good man, he is no longer. He was overwhelmed by adversity, and then shrunken in it. But never did it cross his mind to leave for a stronger man in Cheney. It crossed my mind in his press conference the day after the '06 election. It was clear he was caving, and why not? He never for a moment had the understanding or courage of a conservative.
And he's left Libby to twist, and those two poor border agents. He is despicable in his smallness.

Americans are very forgiving. Christians, at least. George W. Bush is going to go down in history as one of our greatest President. Why?? Because all things are relative. He's being followed by our worst. That's going to alter all of history's view of him. He kept us safe.... in one of the most trying of times in world history.

We're going to be nuked under Obama's administration - all because of Obama's (in contrast to Bush's) ideologies. Right now milktoast (ie. "post modern") sounds great to the American people emotionally. But once we're nuked as the result of Obama and his milktoast rhetoric, we're going to find out we live in a barbaric, not postmodern, world. And everyone will see Obama as the worst President - the one who presided over the downfall and destruction of the USA. THEN, as the reality of the standard against which Bush is fairly measured - the actual times in which he was President and the threats America faced... and how powerfully we were kept safe under his Presidency - he's going to be regarded as the last great American President. Even those who presently criticize him, are going to quickly re-interpret history.

This nation is about to be destroyed in the Judgment of God. It's inescapable at this point, imo, predestined... and just a question of "when". Blind people want to be optimistic. But this is no time for optimism. America is going to dissolve and be destroyed... and that's just life and reality.

How Bush kept us safe is a testimony to the grace of God. He'll go down in history as our last great President.

George shoulda just told the truth about Islam.
Political correctness be damned to hell for all eternity.
Islam is death.

Bush was at once strong and weak as are most of us. I agree with all of his foreign policy and almost none of his domestic policy. This article tried to explain the logic and thinking of Bush but will we ever really know. His unwillingness to defend himself and others has left us with what we face today. The liberal press could have never really stood up to a President willing to use the bully pulpit, which Bush refused to use, that and the veto pen.
That he was never a true fiscal conservative has taken up even further down the road to socialism but who were our other choices. The Democrats have put forth three candidates each one worse than the other now we're stuck with the worst of all.

He should have known within the first 6 months that the "new tone" was destined to failure. The Dems were never going to forgive him for winning Florida. He still tried to play nice with them. The decision not to veto was a huge leadership failure and led many of us to the conclusion that one party rule, even when that party is the one we want in power, is destined to fail. In retrospect, it doesn't have to be if the members of that party are grounded and committed to an ideology. Neither the executive or legislative branches had this commitment.

He probably had the most difficult political opposition that any president has ever dealt with. In my lifetime, I don't ever remember the president constantly being referred to as a liar by the opposition. Add a corrupt press and he had a bad situation.

We did have a good economy for 6 years and he made some progress within the judiciary. But his tendency towards liberalism would never appease the liberals who hated him and made the conservatives who voted for him unable to support him any longer. The result is a 20% approval rating. The only way he will get credit for keeping us safe is if we are attacked once he is gone. His poor communication skills taught us that we can never vote for an inarticulate president again.

When you get to the part where Bush says "I came with the idea of changing the tone in Washington", you uncover the foundation of Bush's principles. Bush is a Lottist, his guiding principle is that one must "go along to get along". At his core, Bush doesn't believe that there's any material difference between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party... and the last 8 years, and the last Presidential election, prove that he's right. So, whatever the Republicans want is OK, and whatever the Democrats want is OK because there's no difference.

On a more positive note, when one identifies the players in the collapse of the financial markets and compares them to President Bush then the value of an Ivy League education becomes apparent. Those diplomas from Harvard, Yale, Princeton and the rest aren't worth the paper they're printed on. The Ivy League is the home of the "no doc" diploma.

Larrey,

Your article made many fine points about the gravity of the role of the presidency and its close alignment with the term, "statesman". The list of the required tools that a good statesman must possess is an excellent checklist for voters to use as a guide for making their choice next time around.

The sad thing about this list is that if we applied it to many prior presidents, many of them would not have made the cut. If we apply it to the incoming president, we must ask ourselves , "why did he"?

Semper Fidelis,
Dave St John

Much of your analysis of President Bush is correct. However, I too saw the AEI interview and I must take exception with your "deer in the headlights" analogy. He was anything but; that said however, I have been, and remain disappointed in much of what Mr. Bush insists was his stubborn goal to change the tenor in Washington. It was a fool's gambit, one that the corrupt MSM and the reprehensible Democrats pounced on. I agree with your assessment that statesmen come to Washington to change policy, not petty human foibles. At times, Mr. Bush acted more like a minister with an unruly congregation, rather than president.

It's easy to trash George W. Bush as evidenced here with this opinion piece and the comments following. He saw the attack on America for what it was. Unlike the weakling who proceeded him he sent a message, attack us and we will retaliate. Retaliate we did. President Bush has kept us safe for eight years. When 9/11 happened I thought we were changed forever, doomed to more attacks, our country changed forever. Instead we learned little and appreciate nothing.

I do not know why he hasn't defended himself and his actions. I wish he had. For example the existence of WMD. We know Saddam Hussein had it, he used it. Our leaders know much more about what happened to it than we do and for some reason President Bush has not revealed the information. I give him the benefit of knowing what the right thing for our country was and is. History will reveal whether he was correct or not.

From his election day on, he was demonized, first as an unelected president with Al Gore demanding recount after recount, delaying the results of the election. His team was not given the proper briefings for transition because of this unheard of action by a candidate unwilling to concede. When he was announced the winner, his nominees were not given due consideration for months and he did not have all of his people in place when 9/11 happened. We forget this. And as conservatives, we did not cry foul either.

President Bush never had a true majority to work with in his entire eight years. He had RINO's who undermined him at critical times. He was unable to get many of his judicial appointees confirmed and the actions of the Republican Senate, Senator Frist's inability to lead and John McCain and the gang of 14 obstruction will be seen as one of the critical failures of his two terms. His inability to balance the courts with conservative appointments will have consequences for Americans for many years to come.

Yet, this man has had eight years to keep us safer. ... (350 word limit)

This article is 100% correct on "turning the other cheek."

It is our responsibility to stand up to evil for our brothers. G.W. Bush's inability to do so has brought our country its first true Marxist president and a stronger Islamic force than ever before seen in history.

President Bush had it all when he came to Washington, A majority in Congress and the Senate and he blew it all. Other than the war in Iraq, which he botched for many years, he failed to accomplish one thing, but kept trying to placate the Democrats that ate his lunch and he never fought back! He failed to keep the Congress and Senate in line and allowed the RINO's to dictate policy. He didn't choose the best and brightest for his Cabinet and the various Agencies and advisors, but second tier ones and cronnies from Texas. In his 8 year tenure, Republicans are now in the minority and will probably stay there until they not only get a spine, but some sharp elbows. The Democrats will "stack the deck" with voter fraud [ACORN], that he and the Republicans did nothing about. He couldn't even make his measly little tax cuts permanent! What an utter disappointment... just like his Father. He may be a very nice man, but a leader, he was not.

I've always thought that part of Bush's problem was his wealth and privileged upbringing. He knows that whatever decisions he makes will not affect him. These types become rather aloof because they've never been up against a wall (poverty, job loss, etc.) and been forced to invest themselves in something. The crisis in his personal life (alcoholism, etc.) is the story of a privileged young man who had the luxury to indulge in these vices because he always had money to fall back on.

Bush's support of the military has always been admirable. I had a bad feeling in my gut however when Bush hid in Nebraska somewhere immediately after the Twin Towers came down. He should have been standing on the rubble in NY denouncing radical Islam (not "terrorism").

Ellie,
Lord Acton once said "All great men are bad men".

Bruce,
He should have known, not within six months, but within the first six days. GWB's first test was the trashing of the White House by the departing Clintonoids. When Bush lied and denied that incident to avoid a confrontation and resulting unpleasantness, he failed his test. He showed weakness and a willingness to let his enemies get away with the inexcusable. He declared himself fair game for the next eight years; the new kid on the schoolyard willing to hand over his lunch money with a smile.

For a conservative, Bush has been a huge disappointment. Like father, like son, some would say. Conservatives need to get together and raise the money that it takes to get our points across vis the airwaves. Has anyone seen the ludicrous ads that disparage clean coal? This is but one example. Why don't we have an ad that tells the American people that we have enough oil offshore to equal 37 years of imported oil? Why don't we have ads that tell the American people about our oil shale in the Rockies? Why don't we have ads that tell the American people about bridges to nowhere or teacup museums or, well you get the idea. If the media won't be a watchdog then maybe we have to rethink our strategy and it isn't by compromise, it's by leading with clear-cut solutions and leadership which the conservative movement is sorely lacking.

It's nice to see all the democrats commenting today. If you sudo intelectuals think Bush was bad, you had better stock up on toilet paper ! You'll be sh^^^^ng down your hind legs when you see what your " Buff" hero obamma has in mind for this contry.

sailormike Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ". . .I don't ever remember the president
> constantly being referred to as a liar by the
> opposition."
>
> I do.
>
> Bill Clinton is STILL hated and vilified every DAY
> by some right wing source. And his WIFE who has
> never been indicted much less convicted - of
> ANYTHING.
>
> As for Obama we do NOT expect nor do we WISH
> anything from the right but mindless hate and
> baseless vilification and unreasoned obstruction.
>
> As Our Glorious Leader might say, "Bring it on!"

Oh but my dear man, you left out one salient point: Clinton DID lie and was impeached for it. That is a matter of public legal record. His wife has been publicly exposed as a liar (Bosnia sniper fire just for a starter). When someone IS a liar, it is expedient to call them a liar. Bush was ACCUSED of being a liar. Many mistakes he has made, but lying isn't his nature as it is with the Clintons and Hussein and his crowd. The Obamanation messiah has been proven to be a LIAR even before he gets into the oval office. Just imagine what will happen when he gets in!

For those of you who think Bush will be treated kindly by history, you forget that history is written by the victors. When this nation fades into history because of the socialists morons in power, the immediate history will be written by marxists. Kruschev was right, they will bury us as a nation, but it comes from within. A thousand years from now after the world enters a new Dark Age where much of modern knowledge will be lost to barbarianism, historians will be looking at ancient history much like we look at Roman and Greecian history. They will analyze and rank our past leaders just as we rank their leaders. Then, and only then, will Bush be viewed more favorably.

His greatest failure is the failure to communicate, and failure to defend himself would come in second. He allowed ... (350 word limit)

I have a slight quible with the following qoute:

"A sound education, a clear and steady mind, real world experience, a moral compass, the ability to listen to and understand conflicting points of view, superior communication skills, common sense and courage are the tools a statesman needs. With the possible exception of education, none of these skills can be taught. They must be lived, learned, and earned."

It seems to me that a "sound education" actually includes a "clear and steady mind, real world experience, a moral compass, the ability to listen to and understand conflicting points of view, superior communication skills, common sense and courage" and is not something seperate and distinct from them.

Gaining real world experience, developing a moral compass, learning the ability to listen to and understand conflicting view points, and gaining communication skills are all components of what, in large measure, an education actually is.

Common sense is gained through these very things; listening to those with more experience than you and seeing the causes of and results of actions taken, both by you and by others.

Courage is developed by facing fearsome things, guided on your moral compass, and pushing through and doing what is right.

Sadly, America has bought the lie that an "education" is synonymous with herding little children into government run propaganda mills, stripped of anything even remotely resembling a "moral compass," devoid of individuality, and no place to learn the meaning of "courage."

Education begins at home, when a child sees his father take a severe hit to the family finances rather than lie on his tax returns. It begins when a child's mother sits him or her down and explains why somethings are right and somethings are wrong. It begins, in my opinion, when a child both hears and sees the truth of the God at his or her parent's knees and in their daily lives. Education begins when a child learns to love both his or her neighbors and his or her enemies. It begins on the play ground when a child sees an older sibling stand up to a bully on behalf ... (350 word limit)

Mr. Anderson,

This article is a rehash of the one you wrote on Dec. 1 re George Bush. Is it your intent to write one of these ""trashing Bush articles" every 28 days or so? Will you still be writing them in 2012? Don't you have any new ideas?

My guess is that you deem yourself to be a great philosopher and to have all of the knowledge and all of the precise attributes necessary to be a great President. If only you could have been elected................sigh. You could have shown the world. You would have done everything perfectly.

I will skip your "stuff" until you come up with something better.

Dear Mr. President:

As your final days of POTUS draws to a close, I just want to say thank you for doing the best you could, and holding your head high while your enemies sought to grind you into dust. They hated you so much, they thought nothing about publishing troop movements and battle plans, putting our military personnel in even greater danger.

I understand why you look so beaten. The majority of your cabinet are typical fair weather politicians, who turned on you if it was politically expedient to do so. There is no such thing as honor and integrity left inside the beltway. You gave it your all, and kept us safe, and the economy going for 8 good years. Thank you. Enjoy your retirement. I will always be grateful that you put the welfare of The People above your own. God Bless.

"Blessed is the man who walks not in the council of the un-godly," Ps. 1:1 I think if anything, Pres. Bush made the mistake of having council with the liberal, self-seeking democrats. IE working with Ted Kennedy on the education legislation. He should have forgot about being bi-partison, it was his biggest downfall.
My biggest disapointment in Pres. Bush was his statement about his not taking the Bible literally. This country is rolling down hill at breakneck speed because many churches teach that the Bible is not God's word but may contain His word. They don't believe in the authority of the scripture and then wonder why they have lost any influence the church may have once had.
It is pretty easy to be a Monday morning quarterback as the author of this article is doing. The President can't look at an instant replay before he makes many of his decisions. I think Mr. Bush will leave a better legacy than a lot of people think.

Matthew-Jerusalem Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have a slight quible with the following qoute:
>
> "A sound education, a clear and steady mind, real
> world experience, a moral compass, the ability to
> listen to and understand conflicting points of
> view, superior communication skills, common sense
> and courage are the tools a statesman needs. With
> the possible exception of education, none of these
> skills can be taught. They must be lived, learned,
> and earned."
>
> It seems to me that a "sound education" actually
> includes a "clear and steady mind, real world
> experience, a moral compass, the ability to listen
> to and understand conflicting points of view,
> superior communication skills, common sense and
> courage" and is not something seperate and
> distinct from them.
>
> Gaining real world experience, developing a moral
> compass, learning the ability to listen to and
> understand conflicting view points, and gaining
> communication skills are all components of what,
> in large measure, an education actually is.
>
> Common sense is gained through these very things;
> listening to those with more experience than you
> and seeing the causes of and results of actions
> taken, both by you and by others.
>
> Courage is developed by facing fearsome things,
> guided on your moral compass, and pushing through
> and doing what is right.
>
> Sadly, America has bought the lie that an
> "education" is synonymous with herding little
> children into government run propaganda mills,
> stripped of anything even remotely resembling a
> "moral compass," devoid of individuality, and no
> place to learn the meaning of "courage."
>
> Education begins at home, when a child sees his
> father take a severe hit to the family finances
> rather than lie on his tax returns. It begins when
> a child's mother sits him or her down and explains
> why somethings are right and somethings are wrong.
> It begins, in my opinion, when a child both hears
> and sees the truth of the God at his or her
> parent's knees and in their daily lives. Education
> begins when a child learns to love both his or her
> neighbors and his or her enemies. It begins on the
> ... (350 word limit)

While George the Compassionate is a man of high moral tone and personal honor; he was an embarassingly ineffective President, clearly out of his depth. To use Macauley's description, he was 'all sail and no anchor', a man w/o core conservative principles, but rather an amalgam of humanitarian impulses. His performance in office is a sad testament to his fecklessness.

The direction of the articles that try to put some insight into every decision made during the last eight years seems to be heading in the wrong direction. We can get the hate and anger message from most any blog or publication. Why? We will never know the EXACT reason why every decision was made. It is not too deep for us or too complicated - we don't know what was going on behind the scenes. I would like us to get more information on the behind the scenes - I want more information on the players. Give me more on Rove and make it a deep article. I want to know if he was the kid on the playground making deals for lunch money, not the bully, who is too obvious. I can spot the bully a mile away, but the weasel is tough to spot. My point is very simple - who did he trust and why did he trust them? And when did those people undermine him? I am not picking on Rove - first example who came to mind.

I did not read your article for some hidden truths or new views. I now read to put the comments into a proper perspective. I am starting to see patterns and I want to know who may be with me or against me. There is a culture war going on with battle fronts that must be identified. We, meaning Conservatives, have been losing many of those battles because we don't know where we are on the front. We may not even be on the front and don't know it. I do not want to be hit by friendly fire by being out of position so maybe we can read articles in the future that will concentrate on the war and the fighters. Looking back is too easy. I will still read because I want information but sorting it out helps me go to war with the forces I have and hope to improve. President Bush taught me many things and I will move on. I will give him ... (350 word limit)

For all you posters that have bashed Bush here for what he did or did not do while he was president, have you not personally contributed to the moral downfall of America's core beliefs and ideals these past eight years by sending your child(ren) into the public arena for an education? And did you not, prior to Bush's appointment, send your children to these same liberal camps to learn to be puppets and mere imitators, to deny/refuse to recognize America as a nation under God? Moreover, will you not now send your children back to the very same institutions in 2009 to be further indoctrinated with the liberalist agenda under Obama's new administration? What a bunch of hypocrites you are.

If you did, and still are, and will continue to allow your children to be raised and dumbed down by the Obamobots after January 20th, then you are as guilty if not more guilty than the man you continue to bash and condemn for his actions. Every single person in this country who has allowed the government to manipulate their offspring to turn from the principles this country was founded on are GUILTY, have no backbone, and are cowards. All of you. You have failed miserably to stand up as an individual and fight the good fight for your children and for your country. Your desire to achieve success and wealth and to have it NOW is your lame excuse for turning your back on your very own children and their future. Now you act like a bunch of spoiled little democrats complaining and whining that it was all Bush's fault.

It's pretty easy to throw stones at GWB. I can't imagine how difficult it must have been to get up every day for the last 8 years and do the job he was elected to do knowing that half of the country and other countries despised him. I cannot imagine the stress, the pressure, or the burden he carried, and so often carried alone.

Larry states in another ... (350 word limit)

Larrey, I'm sorry you were disaffected and disillusioned by my fellow Texan, George W. Bush.

I agree with the point you made through the Plato citation. Plato certainly was no democrat and probably would have blamed failures of the Bush presidency on letting ordinary people vote.

I always thought of Bush as just an average person riding on his father's coattails. Many ordinary people, facing a morally compelling challenge, rise to the occasion. We saw a glimmer of that in Bush after 9/11. But tragically, the opportunities to meet the challenges after 9/11 slipped away because the right mix of sound education, mental clarity, experience, moral integrity, ability to intelligently weigh and understand conflicting viewpoints, communication skills, common sense, and courage just wasn't there. So, I agree with you that Bush won't be remembered as a statesman.