Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Chimpy's legacy: why is this even up for debate?

With all that has gone on over the past few years, and even moreso over the past few months, how is it that I can still see a front page headline in a somewhat reasonable paper (USA Today) that reads: Conflict Will Define Bush's Role in History?

Now granted, the article isn't really the most flattering, and didn't totally make me throw up in my mouth, but still, I just don't see how ANYONE can say anything that would even seem to indicate that the verdict isn't completely in on this miserable failure of a presidency.

In fact, historians even weighed in back in mid 2004, and it was pretty ugly even then. And that was before we all knew about the Plame leak investigation, Republican felon Jack Abramoff and his merry band of criminals, the Social Security debacle, civil war in Iraq, "Brownie", incompetence losing an American city, unconstitutional wiretapping of Americans and countless other clusterfucks over the past 2 years.

So, where does USA Today even get off making comparisons like this:

Bush's allies compare him to Harry Truman, unpopular during much of his tenure but highly regarded in retrospect.
Or this one to our first President and great Revolutionary War hero:

Bush seems to be thinking about the history books, too. When conservative commentator Fred Barnes interviewed the president last summer for his book Rebel-in-Chief, Bush noted he had read three new books analyzing the first president's place in history. "He said, 'Even after 200 years, they're still reassessing George Washington,' " Barnes recalls. " 'What will they say about me?' "

Now, correct me if I am wrong here, but wasn't Truman's motto "The Buck Stops Here" as opposed to Chimpy's motto of "what me, worry" or "the buck stops there"? And as far as I can tell, George Washington didn't go AWOL when he was needed. In fact, the only similarities I can find are that they are both named George and have a "W" as one of their other initials. And I am pretty sure that neither Washington nor Truman was all for the trampling of personal rights and freedoms.

And even if we ignore all of the fuckups, crimes and lies that don't relate to Iraq, how can anyone still think that the jury is out on Bush's legacy when we already know the following:

And that was just off the top of my head. Now let's see some other little tidbits too:

Bush's job-approval rating in the USA TODAY Poll has declined in almost perfect tandem with falling support for the war. In the new poll, his standing sank to a record low, 36%.

That erosion and the focus on the war have cost him political clout on other fronts, from creating health savings accounts to facing congressional opposition to the Dubai ports deal.

The financial bill for the war — now running nearly $6 billion a month — has limited the administration's options on seeking more tax cuts and cutting the deficit.

When the war began, 69% of those surveyed said the United States was "certain" to win in Iraq; an additional 25% said victory was likely. No more: In the new poll, four in 10 predict the United States is likely or certain to lose.

So, we have an administration that repeatedly cut taxes on the very wealthy in a time of "war", pretty much bankrupted the country, encouraged policies that greatly favored corporate cronies including the pharmaceutical, insurance, coal, oil and gas industries, ignored the declining education standards in the US, gutted environmental regulations, trampled on the Bill of Rights, divided this country in a way we haven't seen in decades, "won" 2 elections by shady (at best) methods, repeatedly and willfully violated the Constitution, and lied to Congress, the American people and the world about pretty much everything.

And on the biggest defining theme of this administration (Iraq), we already know so many damning and horrific things.

Remind me again why people are still debating the legacy of this mis-Administration. It seems that 2 words sum it all up, no matter which way you look at it.

Miserable failure.

No comments: