Posted on 07/22/2007 2:52:47 PM PDT by Right-Wing Champion
*This can be found on the first page of the Opinion section of today's New York Post*
BUSH THE WINNER
Why History Will Judge the Prez a Clear Success by William Kristol
July 22, 2007 -- I SUPPOSE I'll merely expose myself to harmless ridicule if I make the following assertion: George W. Bush's presidency will probably be a successful one.
Let's step back from the unnecessary mistakes and the self-inflicted wounds that have characterized the Bush administration. Let's look at the broad forest rather than the often unlovely trees. What do we see? First, no second terrorist attack on U.S. soil - not something we could have taken for granted. Second, a strong economy - also something that wasn't inevitable.
And third, and most important, a war in Iraq that has been very difficult, but where - despite some confusion engendered this month by an almost meaningless "benchmark" report - we now seem to be on course to a successful outcome.
The economy first: After the bursting of the dot-com bubble, followed by the attacks of 9/11, we've had more than five years of steady growth, low unemployment and a stock market recovery. Did this just happen? No. Bush pushed through the tax cuts of 2001 and especially 2003 by arguing that they would produce growth. His opponents predicted dire consequences. But the president was overwhelmingly right.
Even the budget deficit, the most universally criticized consequence of the tax cuts, is coming down and is lower than it was when the 2003 supply-side tax cuts were passed.
Bush has also (on the whole) resisted domestic protectionist pressures (remember the Democratic presidential candidates in 2004 complaining about outsourcing?), thereby helping sustain global economic growth.
Continued at http://www.nypost.com/seven/07222007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/bush_the_winner_opedcolumnists_william_kristol.htm?page=1
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
This is more or less why I am with Bush 100% until the very end.
For all of Bush’s faults — and he has many, and they are glaring — he does understand that his number one job is to protect us from the Jihadists who want to kill us all.
Enjoy the ride.
Good points. On WOT, taxes, stem cell/sanctity of life, court appointments, economy, Bush gets high marks.
Also high marks for effort on social security reform.
I agree, overall, this constitutes a “success”.
The lowest marks I give him are for increases in prescription/medicate and in communication and leadership - he’s just not good at this.
thanks for the post..
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I am upset with Bush for establishing the Kennedy wing of the Republican Party. That said I trust what Bush does more than anything this dweeb Bwilly Kristol or his colleague Fweddie Barnes writes or says. There is much to be said in Bush’s favor, I will welcome the day when someone other than the Weekly Standard points out Bush’s successes.
Bush started getting attacked by the left the evening Gore lost his home state and the election. It hasn’t let up in six years.
With a Republican congress, Bush should have gotten so much more accomplished. Unfortunately the RINO’s in the congress were more concerned with their reelection bids and wallets then with the direction of this country.
Bush made some bad decisions which were intended to placate those in the middle. He also did things to benefit seniors and children at the expense of his Conservative base.
In the end we got two Constructionist justices which will take care of most social issues at the national level while the people take care of it at the local level. We have taken the war to the terrorists and we have a top notch economy.
In my eyes that’s a winning hand.
I'm with you on this. He was still the best choice. His stubborn refusal to give up in Iraq has likely saved our nation and theirs. The lowered deficit and upbeat economy have been icing on the cake. In addition, the newest Supreme Court members will be a blessing for years to come.
We had to wait many years for President Reagan to receive even a small amount of vindication in the MSM.
A couple of good Supreme court judges.
Welcome back to the fold, Bill Kristol.
That’s why he is allowing them to come through Texas, Arizona and California.
I agree neither appointment seems to be the disappointment attached to a Sandra Day O'Connor or a David Souter. That said, if Bush had his way it could have been Harriet Miers which leads to one of Bush's failures. Why didn't his advisors see what those that elected him saw and that was Harriet Miers was not a first rate CONSERVATIVE appointment but someone who got where she got by being a sychophant? The conservative base had to throw a hissy fit to get those two judges who seem to be the real conservative deal and in the end gives Bush a claim to a conservative legacy which cannot be claimed by Teddy Kennedy's No Child Left Behind or Prescription Drugs or Amnesty.
If he understands his job is to protect us from the Jihadists who want to kill us, why does he continue to allow them to sneak across the border at will. His absolute refusal to control the border should tell us that he is not all that serious about winning the war on terror.
.
Praise GOD that...
President BUSH has promised...
Freedom’s return to:
Communist Vietnam
Communist North Korea
Communist Cuba
..as well as..
Freedom’s arrival to:
All the countries of the Middle East
...as America’s own best sefl-protection against future terrrorist attacks here at home.
.
All this while sending us permanently back to Earth’s Moon and then on to the Planet MARS.
Bringing those still living here in the 7th Century AD along for the ride.
.
I think bill is more or less correct, here. Domestic failures are rarely remembered much during an era of intense international troubles. I think, since the War on Terror IS the Bush legacy, he will be viewed as a courageous and prescient president. But we’ll have to wait 50 years before that begins to occur in historical writing, most likely.
Why hasn't he secured the border and established a system to track and deport visa overstays?
March 30, 2006 -- FBI's Mueller: Hezbollah Busted in Mexican Smuggling Operation
Let’s see - he’s made South America safe for communists, he mis-handled the Iraq war by sending in a too small force hampered by politically correct rules of engagment. He’s shrunk the navy. He’s sold out the health and safety of Americans to the Communist Chinese. He’s opened the southern borders. He’s failed to push through his top judicial choices.
Have I missed any of his major acomplishments?
I guess kristol’s check cleared.........
Yes, Bush will be proven a very good President. Like Reagan, it’ll take time for people to see this. Many turned on Reagan too at the end just like now. Fair weather supporters make me sick.
>>Praise GOD that...
President BUSH has promised...
Freedom’s return to:
Communist Vietnam
Communist North Korea
Communist Cuba<<
??
I read the entire piece. Not one word written about Mexican illegals, amnesty or border control. Head in the sand neo-con Kristol. He’s no conservative.
The neo-conservative movement died when Bill Krystal, Richard Perle, and Paul Wolfowitz and the other proponents of preemptive war turned on the President and the policy they had so strenuously advocated for. It's good to see that Mr. Krystal is back on the reservation, but the credibility he and his ilk once wielded has all been forfeited.
Here is a President who will be regarded a success if he fails. That is if he fails and a terrorist actually sets of an A Bomb in a western city, then people will look back and say thee was some one who tried to prevent this. Otherwise I dont’give him much chance.
Many years from now historians will see the bogus bill years as the worst presidency, followed by one of the best w/GWB. The guardian angels of america were hard at work in Florida in 2000 and we have had a much better man at the helm for the terrorist war that was to come.
Yes, he has his faults, he’s no Ronald Reagan as a communicator but a decent christian none the less. His faults are from being naive : the Harriet Myers fiasco, the social security fiasco, the immigration fiasco, the naive belief that bringing democratic elections to iraq would solve all problems there, on and on.
Traditionally the last 2 years of an 8 year presidency are the toughest. Still though, a safe america and a strong economy is a great legasy, it’s because he’s been a leader where it counts. The dems rode the anti-war wave into the majority but as usual are shooting themselves in the foot. Or, no one ever built a monument to honor a critic.
Thus, here’s to you Mr President, you’ve been earning your pay, only 17 more months of punishment left...
.
President BUSH’s Freedom promise was in writing in a letter read aloud by a Vice-Chairman of the California Republican Party.
Read aloud to over 1,000 Freedom-loving Little Saigon, California Vietnamese-Americans selflessly demonstrating in support of the President’s bringing Freedom to the people of Iraq & Afghanistan.
.
Signed:..”ALOHA RONNIE” Guyer
-An event in-person witness
-Veteran-”WE WERE SOLDIERS” Battle of IA DRANG-1965, Landing Zone Falcon
http://www.lzxray.com/guyer_set1.htm
http://www.lzxray.com/guyer_collection.htm
http://www.RickRescorla.com/The%20Statue.htm
.
On other issues, like fundamental government reform, he (along with Congress) has not made any effort since 9/11, and succeeded admirably in turning over Congress to the Democrats. It's hard to tell now whether he never intended to do anything along those lines or whether he gave up due to his overwhelming focus on the WOT.
Me too. President Bush is a winner and has that vision thing. I think he knew early on that he couldn't win the drumbeat against him, so he just went about his business.
LOL. Certainly no room for that in an argument that the Bush Presidency has been a success!
GWB's hiring record is spotty at best. Of course govt service attracts yes men and do-nothings.
The viciousness that Bush has received in the media reminds me of how they were during Reagan. The difference was that Reagan could seem so charming and guileless that accusations famously "didn't stick" and they referred to him as the "Teflon President".
Reagan was lucky that the two biggest military conflicts he had to deal with were Grenada and Beirut. True, he was also fighting proxy wars against communism but they largely didn't involve our own troops dying. Had he been involved in a war such as Iraq or Afghanistan are today, the Left would have attacked him every bit as ruthlessly as they have Bush.
I still believe if John Hinckley's aim had been slightly better, Democrats would have been dancing in the streets.
I disagree with Kristol and others on this point. I think Iraq had to go through a process, part of which was a learning experience by the Iraqi security forces and the overreaching by AQ, by their blowing up so many Iraqi's.
We are now benefiting from this as the Iraqi's are fed up with AQ and are fighting with us. Accordingly, I attribute some of today's successess with the process that unfolded in Iraq under Rummy, et.al.
Bush nominated Harriet Miers by the advice of the inestimable Distinguished Senate Majority Leader from the Great State of Nevada, His Most Elite Exalted Eminence Harry Reid. Senators demanded a female nominee without a conservative judicial record, they got her, and they ultimately rejected her. That rejection opened the door to Samuel Alito, who narrowly passed the Senate on a confusing technicality. We cannot know how Harriet Miers might have performed on the Supreme Court, whether like David Souter or as the ultimate stealth nominee, but we also cannot know whether the Senate would have rejected Alito without the preceding Mires debacle. It’s entirely conceivable that Bush advanced Harriet Miers as part of some strategic gambit with the expectation of her rejection.
I agree with you on every point, except Bush disappointed me on not vetoing the Campaign Finance Reform Act. I know his stance on immigration and I disagree, but think he has something in his genes/religion on that subject. Overall, nothing he has done would have made me voted differently in 2000/2004. Gore or Kerry would be unfathomable - btw, I’m still angry at Conservatives/Republicans who decided not to vote in 2006 and we’re stuck with this damnable Congress.
I think you are spinning, but I like it.
You see artwork in clouds, I don’t. Still, it was a good outcome, however it came about.
I firmly believe that President Bush will go down in history as a great President. Harry Reid, on the other hand, will go down in history as little more than a pain in the a@@.
While he is too far to the left on social issues, there have been NO attacks on our soil since that fateful day and as the economy continues to boom, he heads the list as the ONE being to BLAME!!
The headline, "Why History Will Judge the Prez a Clear Success," might've tipped you off--one would think.
and we reallllly need at least one more.
My statement, which you took out of context, was intended to point out the hypocracy of the WOT, when no attempt is being made to prevent jihadists from coming in the open back door.
The terrorist are coming in legal, and just staying when their time has run out. The borders have little or nothing to do with terrorist.
Well, Mexico could change its ways....why do we have to be the relief valve from the pressure built up by the disparity between the Mexican rich and poor?
Bill Kristol—the Ellsworth Toohey of Hegemonics.
“...Fair weather supporters make me sick...”
Me too. But I saw he would betray us from the beginning.
He hasn’t proved me wrong.
Some of you are so blind.
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.