GW leaves behind a Mess!


This cartoon of Mike Thompson from the Detroit Free Press says it all, I think! Welcome to the White House.

Comments

John said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
John said…
I honestly feel bad for George W. Bush. His legacy is one of disaster. It seems that every policy objective of his, from the very beginning, not only failed, but backfired catastrophically.

The disasters stretch from downsizing the Federal government (consider FEMA and the Katrina disaster), retrenching on environmental regulations, reorganizing the military, the wars in the Afghanistan and Iraq, and include his fiscal and economic policies designed to support the investment sector. And don't forget about the shambles in which he has left the Republican Party!

It has all failed, and the enormity of the failures defy adequate description. As far as I can see, there is nothing he can point to and say well at least that went well. I have heard some refer to his African AIDS initiative, but the significance of that effort remains to be seen, and given the catastrophic damage that his presidency has caused to the nation and the world, I would be surprised if the effort, even if moderately successful, is recalled in two months by a single soul.

John
Anonymous said…
We should all be grateful to Bush. He made it possible for all of us to appreciate the greatness of Barack Obama. If President Obama had come into office when everything was going well, we might never have had the opportunity to observe his genius. But since things are so bad, we will all be able to see, with our own eyes, the astonishing power and wisdom of The One. I promise you, the next four years will reveal his greatness, and will be the best four years in history! Prepare to prosper in peace.
Anonymous said…
Personally I think Obama will actually shape Bush's legacy. If the problems are quickly solved, than we can easily lay the blame at Bush's feet. If not, then we may see the world is not as simple as it once was.

We are in a global world more than ever, even since 2000. 9/11 taught us that those countries on tv can come home to haunt us. 2008 has taught us that our financial system ripples throughout the world and I expect 2009 will show us all how changes in investment patterns in far off countries can have monumental impacts on life in the US. If China won't or can't buy our debt, life gets very difficult.

-Chuck
John said…
Actually, Obama could be a terrible president, and, by virtue of being merely terrible, his years in office would still be better than GWB's. In fact, it is hard to imagine any presidential performance which could equal the disaster of the last 8 years. It is almost as if GWB set out to fail in as many ways as possible.

John
Robert Cornwall said…
The Bush legacy will be -- if you don't believe that government is part of the solution (it never was the solution even in the New Deal), then you will make sure that the government is ineffective. From the very beginning GW put people in positions of leadership whose qualifications had more to do with partisan loyalties than expertise. Obama has by and large chosen Democrats, but Democrats with expertise and leadership abilities.
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
John said…
It is one thing to make political appointments but to appoint the inept is unforgivable.

I have been thinking more on GWB's failure and it permeates perhaps every aspect of the executive branch, from the S.E.C., to the Justice Department, to the Dept of Veteran's Affairs, to the armed services, the intelligence services, the State Department, and, etc. It appears that no aspect of the executive branch escaped the fallout from the GWB administration's failures, ineptitude or outright malfeasance.

In retrospect the catastrophe just gets larger and larger.

And we need to come to an understanding of the reasons behind the failure. GWB is not a bad or evil person. The reasons must be found elsewhere. I suspect we need look no further than to the ideological tunnel vision of GWB's administration.

Ideological extremism is always dangerousness. It sacrifices truth and pragmatism in favor of the abstractions of its ideological objectives, it avoids self-examination or reassessment in light of results, it denies accountability based upon the assumed correctness of its objectives, and it suppresses dissent either as senseless distraction or, at worst, as a threat to the ideological program.

The difference between Nixon and Bush/Cheney is that Nixon's errors were directed toward preserving his reputation and general public approval - Nixon in some sense knew he was accountable. Bush/Cheney's errors were driven by the dogged presumption that they knew their ideological program was correct, no matter what the facts said and no matter what the results were. Because they believed in the virtual theological propriety of their agenda, they believed themselves accountable to nobody.

John

Popular Posts