President Bush defeated John McCain in 2000 because the public rightly perceived him as more conservative.
His two appointments to the Supreme Court have probably saved this nation from the disaster on the Court that Obama would bring. Obama will likely only get to replace Ginsburg and Stevens. Those are both very liberal justices. Replacing O Connor and Rehnquist would have been an immediate and irrevocable national disaster.
President Bush is an awesome leader by his manner of not reducing himself to the ignorant hate that dominates his critics on the right and left. Despite his continually alleged ineptitude, he was on so many issues successful with his agenda— most importantly protecting the nation from further terror attacks.
The winning of two major wars is an astounding extension of American deterrence that makes the Somalias and Lebanaon fiascos look like well. . . fiascos. American deterrence is higher than ever because of his incredible leadership.
In reading the criticisms of Bush you always see the same consistent shallow demeaning attitude. You are forced to recognize that Bush was what his critics most wanted to be: a leader.
Bush was of such extraordinary character that he did not like Bill Clinton try to impose himself on this election or make it about the defense of his legacy— which he would be more than entitled to do. He allowed McCain to happily campaign against him. Its hard to see where that strategy yielded any electoral fruit .
I honestly believe that had he defended Bush more, he would have won more electoral votes.
Bush did reach across the aisle and unlike McCain, he pulled his opponents toward his position. He pulled Lieberman toward his position on national security. He pulled Zell Miller toward his positions on foreign policy. He pulled Senator Kennedy toward his position on educational accountability.
Despite his heroic military service, McCain defined reaching across the aisle as also stepping across the aisle to compromise core principals. McCain happily compromised freedom of speech with Feingold. He happily compromised free market principals on global warming. Reagan, Bush and others reached across the aisle with strength to pull their opponents toward them— rather than the other way around.
I believe McCain may from an optimistic point of view, be the end of the apologetic Republican that emerged after Watergate. His generation still believes that when conflicts arise it is our patriotic duty to give in to the angry and meet them half way. Such an attitude has incited the Left to be angrier than ever knowing that splitting the difference is the best way to get the most.
I agree with your assessment of Bush’s leadership qualities,his dignity and ability to get his policies enacted. My problem is that all too often his policies were liberal and his commitment to conservative values was weak. His “new tone” was the wrong strategy in a time when we needed a true leader, one who could fully articulate and follow through with a conservative agenda. The Medicare drug plan was the first step toward what we now see. I respect W immensely. May God bless him and comfort him in the coming years. We are in for a battle to save this nation, no doubt.