It's a bit late for him. The Bush presidency has been a mix of success and failure.
One of those messages is the publicity side. Reagan had it, Bush II didn't. It's a shame, as this greatly factors into how both men are displayed to the public and how they will be remembered.
I will remember him in truth..not through the distortions of our enemies or political foes.
What I will remember is that we had a president of enormous courage and integrity, who led this nation through some of its most perilous times with honor and dignity.
In a generation things will look different than they do now...perhaps in as short a time as ten years after he leaves office. In fact, I remember how Reagan, who was loathed by a press which suddenly found greatness in him at his funeral, or how the first President Bush suddenly was viewed with great affection and respect after a few years of Clinton.
The democrats and the media set out to destroy President Bush's reputation right after the successful invasion of Afghanistan. I doubt that ANY media strategy would have been successful.
One thing we don't know is how many times the media has told them they WON'T cover a speech in prime time, how many times they have hidden good news and magnified bad, how many times they have implemented a strategy to turn his own base against him through false stories "leaked" by anonymous "insiders."
Mark my words, there will come a day when many of the complainers here on FR will wish that they had someone half as good as George Bush in the WHite House.
Oh, please! At this same time in the Reagan presidency, Reagan was hounded just as much by the media, and was not able to get done what he wanted to do, either. I'm not sure his approval ratings were any better than President Bush's when you compare the time frames.