George W. Bush: ‘No need to defend myself’

George W. Bush: ‘No need to defend myself’ By Jonathan Easley - 04/22/13 07:51 AM ET

Former President George W. Bush said he feels “no need to defend himself” over the high-profile decisions that marked his two terms in office, saying he will leave those judgments to history.

“There's no need to defend myself,” Bush said in an interview with USA Today. “I did what I did and ultimately history will judge.”

Bush, along with President Obama and former Presidents Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Jimmy Carter, will be on hand to open the George W. Bush Presidential Center in Dallas on Thursday.

Bush described the center as “a place to lay out the facts” behind his major policy decisions, including the decision to go to invade Iraq after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, not as a place that will explain or defend the actual policies.

Visitors to the library will be able to assess “the decisions that I had to make and the recommendations I received” at a “decision points theater,” according to Bush. In addition to the Iraq war and troop surge, the theater will focus on his handling of the 2008 financial collapse and the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

In an interview conducted before last Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings, Bush said terrorism should still be a primary concern for the federal government.

“It's apparent that time is quickly dimming our memories,” Bush said of 9/11. “Evil exists still in the form of people who murder innocent people to advance a point of view.”

Bush has taken up painting in his private time – a fact that became known after a hacker exposed some of his private emails. The former president said it helps to keep him “mellow,” and that he’s content in his new life outside of public view.

“I'm happy to be out of the limelight. I truly am,” he said. “My life is obviously much simpler than it was in the past, but in many ways the simplicity creates contentment.”

“Some people get confused about my desire not to have the klieg lights shining on me, but eight years is plenty to be in the lights,” he said.

In an interview last week, the former president also expressed hopes that his brother, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) would run for president.

Asked if the nation was “ready for another Bush” in the Oval Office, he responded “That’s for Je to figure out.”

“I would hope that people would judge, if Jeb were to run, on his merits and his track record,” said Bush, adding “I hope he will run.”

His brother Jeb Bush has said he would weigh a 2016 GOP presidential bid and is seen as a prime contender for the nomination.

There is one Lord and Saviour of Humanity. His name is Jesus Christ.

Here on earth waiting the return of Christ, we are left with the imperfect order of human politics.

The criticisms of President Bush are deeply and profoundly pathological. The inescapable need to borrow from the dysfunction of anti=conservative movements the notion that we are peering into and judging the souls of men is the essence of this pathology.

We somehow know that Bush is a complete and utter betrayal of conservative principals. That is utterly false. The fixation of making it so is ridiculous. Let’s take a moment to analyze your claims. Begin with the general and easy to understand principal that wipes away almost all BDS offered by you. This is not the philosophy club. This is politics. Lesser evils. Too bad if you don’t like that. We choose a comparative advantage in politics. On this simplistic accounting system Bush wins overwhelmingly.

In the aftermath of Reagan/run from lebanon/did amnesty/grew debt more/ gave us OConnor and the now revealed text of Obama/ most debt ever/ pullout no SOFA/ worst ROE Afghanistan it is completely reasonable to assert that yours and so many other posts are:

1. Pro Saddam
2. Pro Taliban
3. Pro Obama
4. Pro Kerry
5. Pro Code Pink
6. Pro Democratic party

Or course you recoil and cannot imagine why you should be assailed in this manner. We have a revealed political order with clear facts. You reject them pretending your rejection has no consequence. We get to choose lesser evils. Bush is much better than McCain. He’s much better than a great array of politicians. The fixated deep rejection of Bush should now be seen in the aftermath of 2103 as an endorsement of all Bush opponents.

1. Islam is ROP. Brillian rhetorical move by Bush allowed us to enlist literal muslim soldiers and muslim allies to fight Islamic radicalism. Here again your absolutism binds you to a policy of genocide against Muslims. You cannot win that argument. We didn’t have to reject Christianity to reject the KKK. We can find specific enemies using Islam as a political supremacy project. In the same way people still practice shintoism in the aftermath of Hiroshima, we can clue our enemies into how we will not give up until the supremacist doctrines are renounced. Bush is right, you are wrong. Your policy cannot be sustained.

2. Bush surged in 2007 against the advice of Jim Baker. Bush lead one of the most aggressive military moves since vietnam and the killing of thousands of islamic supremacists. Again, on the basis of comparative advantage, Bush killed tens of thousands of islamic radicals. NO ONE has killed as many. Reagan ran from the jihadist like a scared little girl. I love Reagan but if we are going to play absolutist games then let’s send him to a cowardly hell for Lebanaon.

3. Re-read the history of fallujah. We did go back as noted above and did massive damage to the groups who did this. Chris Kyle was but one of many treats we provided to these demons. NO ONE has fought harder.

4. Iraq versus Egypt? Libya? Syria? Actually, Iraq is vastly superior to all of the Obama examples and will likely surpass the failing Afghanistan being presently engineered their now. Bush’s vision of democracy is the most intact alternative in the Middle East apart from Israel [whom Bush actually supported.] The US lead an array of covert supports on islamic radicals from Phillipoines to Somalia. Launching an all out war on 1.7 billion muslims is a fools errand at best. Your policy has no possibility of success. Iraq remains relatively successful compared to almost any other middle east state.

5. Iraqi oil production is at record levels. We no longer have sanctions against iraq. Consequent to these rather staggering facts you are: WRONG. The Iraqi people as a group HATE AL Qaeda more than almost any group of individuals in the world. Probably more than Americans do. That along with many other residual committments remain valuable for the long term. The massive increase in global oil supply reduces the costs of oil in a massive way. Further extrapolations would make this exponential.

6. Bush did increase efforts at enforcing the border. By the end of 2008 many illegal immigrants returned to Mexico. Texas has a good history of friendly but verifiable immigration. Perry has a similar view. Texas has a better and more productive view of immigration politics than California. I doubt you really understand the practical problems of illegal immigration.

7. He did increase funding for enforcement and did build more fence toward Mexico.

8. English is not in jeopardy as our official language and his position hardly justifies the grotesque animus people have toward President Bush. It is not clear any past president would sign this either.

9. Bush did actually name the islamic threat on several occasions. Here again nuance is superior to outright policies of genocide like the one you are suggesting. We still have practioners of shintoism but they no longer act on their suicidal potential. This argument is explained above. Bush did temper his language on islamic fascism but he did use the harshest language of any American president. You give him exactly ZERO credit. Musab Al Zarqawi is a much less articulate advocate of Islamic radicalism

10. DHS was completely unnecessary? Oh. Okay. I don’t know if you heard but in 9/11 of 2001 nineteen hijackers seized four aircraft and crashed them into the WTC and the pentagon. The number of major terror attacks on the US after Bush created DHS with Congress during his eight years as president is exactly ZERO. You are very welcome. Its been great being alive has it not. All of the security provisions that you swoon about had sunset provisions and existed within congressional authority. Bush was not a dictator. Congress acted and can act in relation to the president. You might be suprised to find out that there are people out there and even here in the US who want to destroy America. Read the newspaper. You will find the threats to be real. Again, it is surreal how you can make contradictory argumens without hesitation.

11. Patriot act pales in comparison to almost all known domestic powers exercised by presidents in past wars. Here again Congress can cancel the patriot act at any time. The fort hood shooting actually happened. The boston bombing actually happened. The threats are real. To stop such threats, provisions for stopping traitors will actually be substantive. In philosophy world we would just rule such actions out of order and all those mean people would just stop.

12. Bush appointed many pro life people to government positions including the supreme court. Ridge exerted no special powers against pro life groups and again compared favorably to the current administration.

13. Harriet Miers would be fine. There are no specific requirements to sit on the court. She is not sitting on the Supreme Court. Your argument has no impact.

14. No actually, he required TARP and the car bailout to be paid back. All of tarp was paid back and most of the car bailout was paid back. He spent zero funds on the new library at Dallas using taxpayer dollars. All funds were privately raised. He lowered the deficit three years in a row until the democrats crashed the economy and sent deficits skyrocketing.

Anti Bush advocates created the democratic congress and president Obama.

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.