[alicewonders]

However, I truly believe that President Bush did not fight back because of his understanding of what respect for the office of the presidency means.

Of course. George W. Bush comes from a background that fervently believes in humble public service. But somehow - maybe by having a surrogate "attack dog" he could have found a way to counter the relentless smears coming his way. Like water dripping on a stone, eventually it does take its toll.

I think his not-fighting-back laid the path for the upset in the 2006 election, and that was the beginning of it. Bush has a mixed legacy, but I am thankful he was in charge after 911

[Jim Robinson]

Watching the debate video now. Romney bragging about what a small government conservative he was as governor. Right. How about ObamaCare, er, I mean RomneyCare!

[ohioWfan]

I think his not-fighting-back laid the path for the upset in the 2006 election, and that was the beginning of it.

What I remember most about 2006, was that not one Republican member of Congress stood behind the President. No one stood up for the troops in Iraq, and no one stood up for the necessity of the War on Terror.

They all ran and hid. I think if some of them had stood up against the leftist attacks, we might not have lost Congress.

On top of that, there was clearly no one willing to be the "attack dog" that he needed. It was all unfortunate.