Pundits start to see the praiseworthy Bush
Hatchet
By Lucas Roebuck
Now that President Barack Obama has taken office, the angry left and members of the media suffering Bush Derangement Syndrome hopefully have found a cure to their psychosis and can move on with their lives.
Sure, some of tolerance preachers who thrive on Bush hate will hold onto the “prosecute Bush” mantra for a while. Obama, however, appears to see no profit for his administration or the country in having show trials, so his hatchet man Rahm Emmanuel will likely be dispatched to keep the Congressional witch hunters under control.
Bush himself has always held that history will vindicate his presidency. On balance, I agree with him. However, even as Bush was booed at the Obama inauguration, pundits of all ideological stripes were starting to see past BDS and find praiseworthy aspects of Bush.
One common theme was how gracefully Bush, in spite of the hatred, carried himself as president.
“Other presidents may encounter the same level of motiveless, mindless hatred, others may suffer comparable abuse,” wrote J.R. Dunn of the American Thinker, “but we can sure that no one will ever meet it with more equanimity than George W. Bush.”
Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe echoed Dunn’s sentiment: “By all accounts, Bush is neither bitter nor self-pitying about being so unloved. That is partly a function of his personality – in his last press conference, he described self-pity as ‘pathetic’ – and partly the result of knowing that it will not be his contemporary critics who render the final verdict on his presidency.”
But even his contemporary critics have started to find more than a silver lining in the Bush presidency. Some commentators praised Bush, long accused of facist-like tendencies and rampant croneyism, for not living up to that reputation.
“…(Bush) had confounded critics who had predicted that the White House would hand out commutations to CIA interrogators, former Bushies, the rich and famous and corrupt politicians who got caught. … (Bush) did not issue a blanket amnesty for cronies, rich crooks and crooked pols,” wrote Debra Saunders of the San Francisco Chronicle.
“Bush can be legitimately accused of … sins. But he has also been battered with charges of which he can be acquitted now, without waiting for history’s judgment,” writes Cathy Young of Reason Magazine. “For all the cries of jackbooted fascism, Bush never tried to gut American democracy. Yes, some curbs on the rights of terror suspects posed the risk of an innocent person facing a harrowing ordeal – which is bad enough. But there is not a shred of evidence that security-related measures expanding government powers have been used to suppress or punish dissent. … Nor were there any attempts to hobble political activity, despite dire warnings that the GOP cabal would stop at nothing to maintain its hold on power.”
The Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne even begrudgingly said that many of Bush’s domestic policies represented some progress.
“Ironically, the clearest evidence of Bush’s larger failure can be found in the areas where he can claim genuine success. Bush’s prescription drug plan under Medicare and his No Child Left Behind education program were far from perfect. But they reflected broadly shared goals — expanding health coverage, promoting accountability in education — and involved actual bipartisan wrangling and negotiation. Aspects of both programs will endure,” Dionne wrote. “Bush’s dedication to the victims of AIDS in Africa and his dramatic increases in foreign aid were admirable, and surprised his fiercest critics…. For a few months after Sept. 11, 2001, the president governed as a truly national leader.”
Norman Ornstein at the American Enterprise Institute at least found how Bush gracefully transitioned power to Obama worth note. “The nation can little afford a rocky transfer of power. America also faces threats from terrorists and other adversaries, and the first few months of a new administration can be a vulnerable time for the nation — when the full national security and economic teams are not yet in place and no crisis decision-making process has been established.The Bush administration may be leaving the country with big policy problems. But George W. Bush deserves a big gold star for the way he is leaving his office.”
Critics and supporters alike now suggest that the person who will be most important in vindicating Bush will be Obama, who now appears likely to continue some of Bush’s oft criticized policies.
Bruce Anderson of the U.K. Independent writes, “It now looks as if there will be many more continuities between the Bush Administration and the Obama one than many of the new President’s supporters had hoped. That is a tribute to George Bush. It will not be the last.”
The Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer puts it more pointedly. “Except for Richard Nixon, no president since Harry Truman leaves office more unloved than George W. Bush. Truman’s rehabilitation took decades. Bush’s will come sooner. Indeed, it has already begun. The chief revisionist? Barack Obama.
“Vindication is being expressed not in words but in deeds — the tacit endorsement conveyed by the Obama continuity-we-can-believe-in transition. It’s not just the retention of such key figures as Secretary of Defense Bob Gates or Treasury Secretary nominee Timothy Geithner. … It’s the continuity of policy. …. The very continuation by Democrats of Bush’s policies will be grudging, if silent, acknowledgement of how much he got right.”
##30##
