Sunday, May 20, 2007

Only in His Own Mind Is there Any Uncertainty to George Bush's Legacy


But I have a question I've been waiting to ask him, anyways.

First, I need to set the context:

Exhibit one is Bush in the Rose Garden with Tony Blair:
This may not interest you, but I'll tell you anyway -- I read three histories on George Washington last year. It's interesting to me that they're still analyzing the presidency of our first President. And my attitude is, if they're still analyzing 1, 43 doesn't need to worry about it. (Laughter.) I'm not going to be around to see the final history written on my administration.
Exhibits two and three: the 39th President trashing Bush and Blair. First, Jimmy Carter on Bush:
The overt reversal of America's basic values as expressed by previous administrations, including those of George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon and others, has been the most disturbing to me.

We now have endorsed the concept of pre-emptive war where we go to war with another nation militarily, even though our own security is not directly threatened, if we want to change the regime there or if we fear that some time in the future our security might be endangered. But that's been a radical departure from all previous administration policies.

I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history.
And Carter wanted to set the Brits clear on the outgoing first poodle:
Abominable. Loyal. Blind. Apparently subservient. . . . One of the defenses of the Bush administration... has been, okay, we must be more correct in our actions than the world thinks because Great Britain is backing us.

So I think the combination of Bush and Blair giving their support to this tragedy in Iraq has strengthened the effort and has made the opposition less effective and prolonged the war and increased the tragedy that has resulted. . . . caused deep schisms on a global basis. . . .
And now the question:

Mr. President, from the perspective of your having read three biographies of America's first president last summer, I wonder if you have speculated about whether or not centuries after your own death,
  • long after we have erected an Iraqi war veterans' memorial (yet to be designed)

  • long after we have funded the medical costs of permanently disabled veterans in the aftermath of this unneccessary invasion and occupation (yet to be established),

  • long after our children have finished paying back the trillion $ costs of your Iraqi invasion (yet to be totalled),
will historians regard the 43rd President as still being the worst president in American history?

21 comments:

  1. Carter said,
    Abominable. Loyal. Blind. Apparently subservient. . . One of the defenses of the Bush administration... has been, okay, we must be more correct in our actions than the world thinks because Great Britain is backing us.
    So I think the combination of Bush and Blair giving their support to this tragedy in Iraq has strengthened the effort and has made the opposition less effective and prolonged the war and increased the tragedy that has resulted. . . . caused deep schisms on a global basis. . . .
    ---- end quote.
    I will be a contrary here to Carters idea, although you notice that he said ''apparently subservient'' . I think he said it that way on purpose...
    I believe it is very much the other way around, and that Britain exerts a huge influence of the U.S. through their banking system, and corporations. British Petroleum made a fortune keeping Iraqi oil off the market, and the Bank of England always makes huge war profits when England is involved. War is big business for Britain, and they still view us as a colony that they can mine for money. They are the number one investor in the American economy.
    ------ The legacy of Bush?
    Ha ha. Thats an easy one. Carter is right on target,
    "I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history."

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Bush administration has released a directive called the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive. The directive released on May 9th, 2007 has gone almost unnoticed by the mainstream and alternative media. In this directive, Bush declares that in the event of a “Catastrophic Emergency” the President will be entrusted with leading the activities to ensure constitutional government. The language in this directive would in effect make the President a dictator in the case of such an emergency.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Prime Minister Brown may not follow Blair's example of poddle. (Read this from the Telegraph.) If the Brits abruptly pull out of eastern Iraq, it could cause a major logistics problem for the USA. U.S. troops will have to be siphoned off from somewhere to take up the slack securing the logistics between Kuwait and Baghdad.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm certain gratified that Carter ticked off preventive war as one of Bush's legacies which will be one of the most difficult to repudiate, erase and reverse. I think of all the aggrieved victims of the Bush administration's ruinous swath in this world, the American people - as a people - are the most oblivious of this specific travesty. Stigmatized for inventing this malevolent theory, they (we) will suffer mightily for future decades.

    The White House on Sunday dismissed Carter as "increasingly irrelevant". Gone are the days when this White House has the imprimatur to fix relevancy. And Carter should know that. However, he seems to have backed down this morning. The MSM is gloating, Jimmy Carter backs down after damning Bush foreign policy. More's the pity. The dude is over 80, isn't he?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I am convinced that if Blair hadn't promised in 2002 to back-up Bush's plans on Iraq, Bush wouldn't have invaded Iraq.

    He needed a major world ally and found Blair who stupidly gave an unequivocal support 6 months before Bush went public with his invasion plans.

    Which head of government in the West would commit his nation to something so encompassing as war without any caveats? Blair did and really, to this day, we don't understand what Bush had on him that he did such thing without so much as a minute of reflection.

    Blair was an asbolute pillock. He took it on himself to assume presidential powers when he was a Prime Minister, and forgot that it's the cabinet en toto that decides on death and life decisions involving Britain.

    When Arentina invaded the Falklands, Margaret Thatcher as befitting a Prime Minister presented her plans to cabinet - she wouldn't have taken it upon herself to unilaterally decide on going to war over the Falklands without consulting the cabinet and obtaining their assent.

    Blair did the opposite - he gave his word to Bush first, told the cabinet about his promise to Bush and then worked his ass out to convince the cabinet, got media on side and before anyone could even comment, he had browbeaten the cabinet into fixing facts and intelligence around his promise to Bush.

    It was a fait accompplit!

    Incredible but true!

    ReplyDelete
  6. It is no coincidence that the five largest nations involved in selling arms to the rest of the world, are also the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council!
    Bush is still being rewarded for having made his pals so much money.

    To bad Carter wimped out. That does not really surprise me though. He no doubt is tired of himself being tagged as one of the worst Presidents.
    Just when he did something interesting for a change, he blew it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Geez! Poor Carter. Skip is right - he blew it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Carter calumnies has a long way to go before senile dementia sets. There are 41 presidents remaining to tuck under his belt.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Worst ever.

    In 50 years, the historians will review his inane speeches and simplistic worldview and be aghast at the idea that America re-elected that buffoon.

    Carter is too little too late.

    Iraq is on autopilot, Iran is in the crosshairs, and nothing (and no one) is going to stop them from doing whatever the hell they want in the Middle East. We are permanently ensconced in Iraq and will never withdraw.

    ReplyDelete
  10. To bad Carter wimped out. That does not really surprise me though. He no doubt is tired of himself being tagged as one of the worst Presidents.
    Just when he did something interesting for a change, he blew it.


    Oddly enough...ditto on that.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm less interested in the posturing than the substance, tell me, Carter, whose adiministration has been worse for us and the world? Name him! Perhaps he has a hard time valuing the past wrongs by presidents before we entered WWII; that's authentic. Maybe he's not willing to project the long term effects that Vigilante is pointing to.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Oh, and maybe he's having hard time blaming Bush for Reagan's foreign policy legacy? I'm stunned that he seems to suggest that Bush has turned his back on Reagan's legacy...in my mind he has simply made Reagan's foreign interventions state policy.

    ReplyDelete
  13. They say the victors write history. In Bush's case there seems to be only losers. Nobody can gloss over that.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Bush has proved himself impervious to criticism, reason and guilt. If he finishes his term, he will laugh all the way to his grave. In his dying days, in his mind, he will be going out as a winner. Just a misunderstood winner.

    ReplyDelete
  15. So Carter wimped out. He can't stand on his calumnies so he retracted. Not so with cowboy dubya. After 911 the internet changed the statue of liberty - instead of the torch, it was a bird sign. Dubya echoed it with "bring them on - dead or alive". I will prefer a cowboy to a wimp ... anytime.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Wild Turkey makes a case for electing big mouth cowboys (all hat and no cows). Bush said he would get Osama dead or alive: he got nuthin. He said OBL could run but he couldn't hide: OBL did both. GWB started a fucking war in Iraq by saying "Bring 'em on", and he can't finish 'em off. 3,434 KIA & 20,000 WIA!

    What? You stopped off on the way home from a bar to dish out this crap?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Carter was a bad president, but he's a good man. He's accomplished a lot of good as a private citizen, such as Habitat for Humanity. M.D. I don't know if it's too little, too late.

    However, I wish he'd stood by his assertion, which we all know is true.

    Hillblogger, I had to snicker a little about Thatcher and Falklands (Malvenas). Talk about the mouse that roared: Thatcher, in her infinite wisdom, sent troops over to an island home to 24 people. We all know that Thatcher had far more cajones than Reagan.

    Urbanpink and skip are right: this is the most deleterious administation in history--not only to America, but to the world.

    One last note to eagle: all the presidunce did was steal a line from Reagan when he was governor of California. During the Berkeley Viet Nam war protests, Reagan was quoted as saying "If they want a bloodbath bring it on -- dead or alive." Shrub cribbed that line from Ray-Gun.

    I really wish we'd stop electing actors as governor in our state.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Stella, on Thatcher: I think it's more than a urban myth that Thatcher is the one who rammed a rod of steel up the arse of Bush Sr. to get him to mobilize against Saddam's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. As I recall, she flew all the way to Aspen for a face-to-face with him to tell him what was what and get him off the fence. As I was then a Al Gore war hawk type guy at the time, I could not abide the slow pace at which George Sr seemed to be plodding toward war. I always thought it was Thatcher who lead Daddy Bush into war as if he were a spaniel. Maybe I should ask Hills for corroboration on this, because I'm only relying on my highly questionable memory.

    ReplyDelete
  19. He sounds so concerned about what will happen! It's like he's reading this stuff because he knows he's going to be trashed and needs to find a way to feel better. Comparing himself to Washington? What a joke!

    And my attitude is, if they're still analyzing 1, 43 doesn't need to worry about it. (Laughter.) I'm not going to be around to see the final history written on my administration.

    He also appears to have a bit of a Caligula complex, if we can believe the stories coming out:

    [thunping chest] I'm the President!
    I'm the President! I'm the President!

    I bet George Washington never said that. Wasn't he the one who feared executive power?

    ReplyDelete
  20. The failure to find Bin Laden falls squarely on the Bush administration's abandonment of the war on terror and removal of resources to get the job done. Under any circumstances, the hunt would be exceedingly difficult, with no guarantee of success, but Bush and his pathetic crew have brought us nothing but guaranteed failure, which is what actually underscores the lack of progress.

    ReplyDelete