Posted on 11/01/2005 7:55:40 PM PST by neverdem
SALT LAKE CITY - After President Bush has left office and historians start to chronicle his legacy, Friday, Oct. 28, 2005, may turn out to have far less significance than Thursday, Dec. 15, 2005.
Friday, Oct. 28 was a sort of "black Friday" for Mr. Bush, in which he endured the indictment of a senior aide, I. Lewis Libby Jr., following a string of presidential problems that have eroded public support for the president.
But Thursday, Dec. 15 is the day when Iraqis choose a new parliament to serve for the next four years. If Iraqis, who have exhibited great courage in braving death threats from terrorists to take fledgling steps toward democracy and vote in earlier elections, pull this big one off successfully, it will do two things.
First, it will send a momentous signal throughout the Arab world and accelerate a movement toward freedom that is already stirring in countries like Kuwait, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and even Syria.
Second, it would set the scene for carefully and cautiously beginning the withdrawal of some American troops.
It's a tenet of presidential politics that public opinion is formed on the basis of how a president manages domestic policy. There is supposed to be no political traction in foreign policy. But history is far more likely to measure this president on his conduct of foreign, not domestic, policy. For what happens in Iraq will likely be the tipping point that will determine whether the Arab region moves away from backwardness and suppression or remains bitterly aloof from the changing world at large. If Iraq triggers momentum in a positive direction in the Middle East, Mr. Bush must be given credit for a significant supporting role.
None of this speculation is intended to diminish the problems that face him at home. One must wonder who the White House staffers were who did not immediately perceive the enormity of damage from hurricane Katrina and urge the president to act with more urgency than he did. Similarly, where were the staffers who miscalculated the opposition to Harriet Miers as a Supreme Court judge and let the president go down that dead-end road?
Meantime, with the political capital from his reelection eroding as a result of such gaffes, Bush may face a tough battle in getting his new nominee, Samuel Alito, appointed to the Supreme Court, and in achieving any victories on such issues as Social Security and income-tax reform.
His key political adviser, Karl Rove, will for the moment be on hand, having evaded indictment similar to that which caused the resignation of Mr. Libby. However, Mr. Rove would hardly be human if he were not distracted by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's indication that his involvement in the Valerie Plame case is still being investigated.
In any event, the departure of Libby, who was both chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, and a senior adviser to the president, may hobble Mr. Cheney's immediate usefulness to the president because Cheney himself is caught up in the Valerie Plame story and may be in court explaining whatever role he did, or did not, play in that saga.
As of now, the White House is denying speculation about a White House staff shake-up. But the ground around the president is shifting. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who presided over a brilliant military operation in Iraq but for whom the postwar occupation has been horrible, is far less evident than he once was. Cheney may be less forceful and influential as he deals with fallout from the Plame case. With these two conservative stalwarts wounded, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is a star in the Bush cabinet, with easy access to the president; and, at least in the foreign policy area, she may be the president's principal adviser.
It is a strength of the American system that Libby must be held innocent until proven guilty. Nevertheless, the day of his indictment was a dismal one for the president: He had one senior White House official indicted on serious charges, and another (Rove) told that he is still under investigation. But Bush, the cornerstone of whose foreign policy is the spread of democracy, paid tribute to the qualities and methods of the special prosecutor.
In announcing Libby's indictment, Mr. Fitzgerald said: "The law applies to everybody." Even to those in high places in the White House. That, for all the world to see, is democracy in action.
• John Hughes, a former editor of the Monitor, is editor and chief operating officer of the Deseret Morning News.
President Bush ranks pretty high, in my book.
Bush has handled tough times for years and he can handle them. He is strong and has his faith in his God. He'll be fine. As for history? They will record him as the greatest President ever.
Bush has handled tough times for years and he can handle them. He is strong and has his faith in his God. He'll be fine. As for history? They will record him as the greatest President ever.
He will be remembered just fine by history.
Right now we have work to do to make sure we have a history.
A lot gonna depend on whether terrorists come accross our southern borders and cause a major disaster
Right now we have work to do to make sure we have a history.
Hear, hear!
Isn't it odd that this shows up just a couple posting after this article:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1513809/posts
Its like someone finds a need to counter a positive article
with a so-so one.
He will be ranked far, far above Clinton.
If he would close the borders, I'd make him a Saint.
He will be remembered quite well by history because I will be one of those writing it.
Y'see John, I hope I can call you John, history is a far better judge than all the hacks and pundits whose perception of a presidency is colored by their biases.
History will look back at the presidency of George Bush and rate it well, I believe.
Mine too.
He won’t go down as one of the greats, and won’t go down as one of the worst Presidents. He will be remembered as doing a good job on the war on terror, hopefully be remembered for laying the groundwork to overturn Roe v Wade but will be remembered also and for missing opportunities on spending and the borders. Ultimately I think he will be remembered for shifting the spending habits of the Republican party leftward.
Very nice surprise!!!!
History will remeber Bush as the one who stood up for America, and did the tough things that needed to be done, like Lincoln, while Clinton will simply be remembered as a corrupt footnote betwwen Reagan and Bush II....
Who today remebers anything about Andrew Johnson?
I know this comes as a big surprise to the 100%ers but life does NOT revolve around their personal political fixations on the border or spending our what ever else Mike Savage tells them to be angry about today.
Nothing in Life is perfect. As long as the 100%ers keep demanding perfection out of politicians, they are doomed to a life of angry political irrelevancy. Politics is about compromises. You make peace with those who are closest to your own goals. If the 100%er cannot grasp that fundemental reality, they might as well go join one of the fringe 3rd party groups where they, and the other 1000 people who agree with them 100%, can sit around and pat themselves on the back for their ideological purity.
Nobody ever did say he was perfect. He will be remembered as above average. But he will never be remembered as one of the all-time greats. I'll go so far as to say that in my lifetime he is the second best behind RWR but school children won't learn about him fifty years from now like they do Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln, and like they will with the Gipper.
Pres. A. Johnson got a raw deal. He was impeached for violating a blatantly unConstitutional law passed by Congress which interferes with the President's Constitutional right to fire "superior officers."
A real Horatio Alger, from poverty he became POTUS. He was a good honest man who remained in the US Senate despite the secession of Tennessee during the Civil War. He was merciful towards Southern Patriots and helped the Reconstruction of the South.
His one weaknes may be for alcohol, but he'd make a better President than the Peanut Guy or the 'toon anyday. He'd probably run as a Republican too, no way the Dems will recieve a "racist, Jesus freak."
Who cares how history rates him. The President is not in office to earn "ratings", but to lead this country and keep its citizens safe.
Maybe the democrats have forgotten their purpose, but I won't.
I don't think Bush cares all that much how they rate him - and I know it irritates the left.
But .. the dems should be more worried about how the public is going to react in Nov 2006 to this stupid and childish stunt today.
Spending? Presidents are rated on doing great things, like bringing down communism, or taking on terrorism. The green eye-shade stuff never makes the history books.
Spending under Bush will not hurt him, anymore than the "balanced budgets" under Clinton will help him.
Clinton did nothing, except watch the GOP Congress balance the checkbook.
No small accomplishment that.
For surviving the non-stop persecution and vilification alone, he rates A++.
And it won't be long before the American people rue the day they played ostrich on the social security issue.
And if all works out well with Roberts and Alito, Bush will be remembered for turning the judicial battleship Lefty to starboard for many, many years.
Nobody will give a crap about spending that is less a percentage of GDP than the Reagan years.
A "supporting role"? Sheesh. GW has produced, directed, and starred in this drama.
"Who cares how history rates him. The President is not in office to earn "ratings", but to lead this country and keep its citizens safe.
"
Something Bill Clinton never learned.
No, it's called co-incidence.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1513809/posts
Its like someone finds a need to counter a positive article with a so-so one.
As it happened, I posted Reid calls president latter-day Fillmore at 6:44:16 PM EST, in which more than a few folks came away with the impression that Harry Reid made a complete fool of himself.
Next I posted NAACP leader voices concerns about Alito (because conservatives are happy!)at 9:54:55 PM EST. That was the only reason the NCAAP should be concerned that I could discern.
I was pinged to An Iraqi city becomes turnaround story. I thought this thread's reference to history and the gambit by Bush in the Middle East seemed just right in order to check if Christian Science Monitor articles had to be excerpted, like the story about Baquba.
Your suspicion of my motivation doesn't seem to serve you well. Maybe you should check their posting history before you impugn someone's motivation.
While he wants to be remembered well in history, President Bush is much more concerned with hearing "Well done, you good and faithful servant, ... now enter into the joy of your Lord"
I had no suspicion about your motive, In fact, I evaluate each story without even realizing who posted them.
I was remarking on how it was that stories can be about the same event and come away with such opposite viewpoints.
I'm not stalking your postings, honest.
As one of the most succesful and influential presidents in American history.
Agreed. He will be remembered as the President that helped democratize the middle-east and to Mexicanize the US!
Bubba's and the Dems, "rose colored glasses" were ripped off on 9-11.
Bubba didn't change security measures in the USA after the 1993 bombing of the Twin Towers. NOTHING!! He "refused" Usama and played footsies with the UN.
When I was a kid, I remember thinking that those folks around the Suez Canal are crazy. It must have been the Suez Crisis. When? I was very young.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.