The Treatment of Bush Has Been a Disgrace

[SkinsOrlando]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122584386627599251.html

Earlier this year, 12,000 people in San Francisco signed a petition in support of a proposition on a local ballot to rename an Oceanside sewage plant after George W. Bush. The proposition is only one example of the classless disrespect many Americans have shown the president.

According to recent Gallup polls, the president's average approval rating is below 30% -- down from his 90% approval in the wake of 9/11. Mr. Bush has endured relentless attacks from the left while facing abandonment from the right.

This is the price Mr. Bush is paying for trying to work with both Democrats and Republicans. During his 2004 victory speech, the president reached out to voters who supported his opponent, John Kerry, and said, "Today, I want to speak to every person who voted for my opponent. To make this nation stronger and better, I will need your support, and I will work to earn it. I will do all I can do to deserve your trust."

Those bipartisan efforts have been met with crushing resistance from both political parties.

The president's original Supreme Court choice of Harriet Miers alarmed Republicans, while his final nomination of Samuel Alito angered Democrats. His solutions to reform the immigration system alienated traditional conservatives, while his refusal to retreat in Iraq has enraged liberals who have unrealistic expectations about the challenges we face there.

It seems that no matter what Mr. Bush does, he is blamed for everything. He remains despised by the left while continuously disappointing the right.

Yet it should seem obvious that many of our country's current problems either existed long before Mr. Bush ever came to office, or are beyond his control. Perhaps if Americans stopped being so divisive, and congressional leaders came together to work with the president on some of these problems, he would actually have had a fighting chance of solving them.

Like the president said in his 2004 victory speech, "We have one country, one Constitution and one future that binds us. And when we come together and work together, there is no limit to the greatness of America."

To be sure, Mr. Bush is not completely alone. His low approval ratings put him in the good company of former Democratic President Harry S. Truman, whose own approval rating sank to 22% shortly before he left office. Despite Mr. Truman's low numbers, a 2005 Wall Street Journal poll found that he was ranked the seventh most popular president in history.

Just as Americans have gained perspective on how challenging Truman's presidency was in the wake of World War II, our country will recognize the hardship President Bush faced these past eight years -- and how extraordinary it was that he accomplished what he did in the wake of the September 11 attacks.

The treatment President Bush has received from this country is nothing less than a disgrace. The attacks launched against him have been cruel and slanderous, proving to the world what little character and resolve we have. The president is not to blame for all these problems. He never lost faith in America or her people, and has tried his hardest to continue leading our nation during a very difficult time.

Our failure to stand by the one person who continued to stand by us has not gone unnoticed by our enemies. It has shown to the world how disloyal we can be when our president needed loyalty -- a shameful display of arrogance and weakness that will haunt this nation long after Mr. Bush has left the White House.

Mr. Shapiro is an investigative reporter and lawyer who previously interned with John F. Kerry's legal team during the presidential election in 2004.

Food for thought, interesting point regarding Truman/Bush similarities to tasks faced in office.

[rincewind]

I've been trying to convince my wife about the Truman comparison for a few weeks now, she refuses to hear it. I agree that as of right now it seems Bush was a horrible president, but history may grade him much different. I wish more people grasped that concept.

[PeterMP]

History isn't going to grade him much different unless there are multiple terrorist attacks (or one REALLY big one) in this country in the next 4 years (none of which can come in the next 9 months).

He's not escaping torture, being wrong/lying on WMD, errosion of the right to privacy, or the economic downturn. On carrying out Iraq, he MIGHT turn out to be "okay", but even there, there will always be the "what if" he'd have canned Rumsfeld sooner (or even from the beginning) and used more troops.

[E-Dog Night]

Sometimes life deals a decent person an unfair blow. In most cases, however, people get exactly what they deserve - they reap what they sew.

Let's not start the revisionist history with this maggot that has soiled the White House for eight years. He was a horrible man who presided over the most divisive, destructive presidency in American history. He's left the country in shambles as he continues to push for un-American policies on his way out. Despicable doesn't even begin to cover it.

If anything, he has been treated far to kindly. He should have been impeached long ago.

[Special K]

I think we will be more favorably looking back on the Bush presidency in 50, 100 , whatever years once we are able to put things into historical perspective and see how many obstacles Bush had to overcome while in office (not that he handled most stuff perfectly).

And I agree that people completely disrespecting him, calling him stupid, etc. has been disgraceful. People may have done that somewhat with Clinton, but not on this widespread of a scale. Just because you don't agree with someone's political views or how they've run their office does not give you an excuse to be a petty, disrespectful jerk.

[Guest sith lord]

Yeah, and Bush deserves it.

[SkinsOrlando]

Peter what you listed is what it would take for you to "view" his presidency differently not necessarily how history will view it. Not saying you're wrong but your post seems to speak in an absoluteness. It took 30 years after Truman left before people took a hard look at the hand he was given to work with, history will not judge Bush for years to come either.

[Popeman38]

Sometimes life deals a decent person an unfair blow. In most cases, however, people get exactly what they deserve - they reap what they sew.

Let's not start the revisionist history with this maggot that has soiled the White House for eight years. He was a horrible man who presided over the most divisive, destructive presidency in American history. He's left the country in shambles as he continues to push for un-American policies on his way out. Despicable doesn't even begin to cover it.

If anything, he has been treated far to kindly. He should have been impeached long ago.

And you want others to give Obama the benefit of the doubt?

[Burgold]

I do think Bush didn't warrant being as shafted by the Republican party as he was during this election. They really treated him like a leper. In a way it's foolish because do you think that people aren't going to make the association anyway. There certainly were ways to selectively embrace what the Republicans have achieved over the last eight years. Bush has been a poor President, but he was not an evil or bad man.

[Rocky21]

Bush's treatment of the American people has been a disgrace.

[StJoe4Life]

I think we will be more favorably looking back on the Bush presidency in 50, 100 , whatever years once we are able to put things into historical perspective and see how many obstacles Bush had to overcome while in office (not that he handled most stuff perfectly).

And I agree that people completely disrespecting him, calling him stupid, etc. has been disgraceful. People may have done that somewhat with Clinton, but not on this widespread of a scale. Just because you don't agree with someone's political views or how they've run their office does not give you an excuse to be a petty, disrespectful jerk.

COMPLETELY agree.

[Guest sith lord]

I do think Bush didn't warrant being as shafted by the Republican party as he was during this election. They really treated him like a leper. In a way it's foolish because do you think that people aren't going to make the association anyway. There certainly were ways to selectively embrace what the Republicans have achieved over the last eight years. Bush has been a poor President, but he was not an evil or bad man.

Can you blame McCain for distancing himself from Bush? Bush is the face of an unpopular war and a very bad economy.

[81artmonk]

I agree. Watch what happens to people who talk poorly of Obama. It will be a blood bath.

People don't realize that tolerance is onesided to the left. You must be tolerant of their views but it doesn't work the other way.

[Capt Rich Fla]

Sometimes life deals a decent person an unfair blow. In most cases, however, people get exactly what they deserve - they reap what they sew.

Let's not start the revisionist history with this maggot that has soiled the White House for eight years. He was a horrible man who presided over the most divisive, destructive presidency in American history. He's left the country in shambles as he continues to push for un-American policies on his way out. Despicable doesn't even begin to cover it.

If anything, he has been treated far to kindly. He should have been impeached long ago.

Hoooooly ****.:doh:

[TMK9973]

What a joke article. It says based on his 2004 speech he showed Bi-Partisan?

The next day he declared that he had a "Mandate" and that he was going to use his "political capital" based on his 1% victory.

He never tried to reach out. Once repubs controlled the house and senate he pissed off Dems by not including them in ANYTHING. He never talked to them, didn't invite them to the white house, from 2003 to 2005 Dems couldn't even get a meeting with him on most issues. Bush would discuss with repubs what they wanted and then ram it down the throat and SAY he wanted to compromise with Dems, but then would never agree to any Dem demands. His idea of compromise was "Do what I say and I won't bash you".

Bush is not a evil man. He tried to do what he thought was best for this country. He loves this country and believed he was always doing the right thing.

However- His refusal to ever listen to anyone that didn't agree with him, his refusal to acknowledge that what he thought to be fact, might not be fact, and his failure to examine his core beliefs when evidence suggested them to be wrong made him the worst president of modern times.

[prophet]

I agree. Watch what happens to people who talk poorly of Obama. It will be a blood bath.

People don't realize that tolerance is onesided to the left. You must be tolerant of their views but it doesn't work the other way.

Bingo!

I do think the treatment of Bush has been shameful.

[mjah]

He's not escaping torture, being wrong/lying on WMD, errosion of the right to privacy, or the economic downturn.

He also isn't going to escape Katrina, his self-created buffoon image, stacking the Justice Department with political appointees, or the way he led the country into Iraq.

The WSJ op-ed page is always good for some laughs, and this is a great example. Calling Bush's 2004 inaugural address a "bipartisan effort" is the very height of unintentional presidential comedy.

Bush was bipartisan the same way I'm subtle: Not at all, not even in the slightest. He was the most unilateral, divisive president of my lifetime. The only bipartisan success he had was in convincing both sides of the aisle that he sucks.

All the more reason to look forward to a guy who, whether he's great or not, will at the very least carry out the motions of considering multiple viewpoints. Hopefully that mindset will trickle down into the popular conscience.

On carrying out Iraq, he MIGHT turn out to be "okay", but even there, there will always be the "what if" he'd have canned Rumsfeld sooner (or even from the beginning) and used more troops.

If Iraq ends up seeding democracy in its neighbors instead of regressing to a brutal dictatorship and/or a fundamentalist banana republic, then Bush could get a good judgment on this despite his many huge Iraq mistakes.

On the other hand, it might not matter much. With domestic issues increasingly coloring his legacy, Bush is looking more and more like Herbert Hoover than Harry Truman.

Duplicating Truman's legacy was probably a longshot anyway, given that Truman didn't have the all-encompassing litany of screw-ups that will undoubtedly color historians' interpretations of the Bush Iraq plan.

[TMK9973]

I agree. Watch what happens to people who talk poorly of Obama. It will be a blood bath.

People don't realize that tolerance is onesided to the left. You must be tolerant of their views but it doesn't work the other way.

Give me a break.

People accused Bill and Hillary clinton of MURDERING his long time friend, Vince Foster, and then covering it up....

Doesn't get any worse then that.

[scuppajones]

Bush has been a disgrace to the office of President. He has made massive errors in judgement from time the he began serving. It is going to be hard for Obama to dig out of the mess Bush has made here and abroad. The end of Bush's reign of error is a great step forward for America.

[TrungCandidate]

So Bush really only listened to the conservative side of things. What is Obama going to do? He has voted for his party 97% of the time. Is that all of a sudden going to change? Bush has dealt with the worst terrorist attack in US history, probably the worst national disaster in US history (Katrina), and has faced off against the strongest terrorist organization in the world. The all democrat congress has had one of the lowest approval ratings ever. To blame Bush for everything is extremely ignorant. What could he have been impeached for..its not like he cheated on his wife with an intern in the white house.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Bush let Ted Kennedy write No Child Left Behind- mistake

Signed a bloated farm bill-mistake

Steel tarrifs- mistake

Allied himself with Dems on the immigration issue in 2006- HUGE mistake seeing how hispanics overwhelmingly voted for Obama

All of his attempts to reach across the aisle were huge errors

[Kunia5]

You weren't paying attention during the Clinton years, were you? The animosity was continuous and gratuitous.

That's when the personal hatred in politics became institutionalized. Bush, unfortunately, is reaping what the neo-conservatives started in 1980, and continued in 1994.

Both sides should curb their immature and cynical instincts. I'm a Democrat, but I really wasn't happy seeing Franken win. He's cynical, mocker, attacker which we don't need in our gov't.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122584386627599251.html

Food for thought, interesting point regarding Truman/Bush similarities to tasks faced in office.

[The Evil Genius]

Bush let Ted Kennedy write No Child Left Behind- mistake

Signed a bloated farm bill-mistake

Steel tarrifs- mistake

Allied himself with Dems on the immigration issue in 2006- HUGE mistake seeing how hispanics overwhelmingly voted for Obama

All of his attempts to reach across the aisle were huge errors

Actually, his severely limited attempts to reach across the aisle were a mistake. Had he actually done it with great frequency, who knows the outcome? Dubya's presidency will be forever tarred by his deflect and divide tactics (and not by the 4-5 times he actually reached across the aisle as your pointed out).

[Mad Mike]

Damn right. Having a disagreement is one thing but the vile nature of the treatment of Bush has been a disgrace. The man is not Hitler. He's not evil. If you want to see evil, study Saddam Hussein and his sons and consider what the world would be like if they were in power for the next 50 years.

:2cents:

[Sebowski]

For as bad as Bush has been for the last 8 years he is getting off easy.