And when Bush did try to reform entitlements, he got practically no support from his own party. When he did veto a spending bill members of his own party crossed that line to stand with the Democrats and over ride the veto.

And when it comes to the financial meltdown, Bush did not do anything that leaders of nations all over the world were not doing and a lot of the people who are angry about it have come up with no alternatives at all..other than bring on the Great Depression 2. If people think that will help his legacy or if they think that in the long run allowing the financial sector to collapse under a Republican president would actually help the Republican party, then they need to take another look at who won the election a few weeks ago. The American people are in no mood to be taught a lesson.

Unforutnately for Bush he gets the blame but none of the credit.

Thanks W!!!

Bush will be known as a war time president and nobody will eveer mentioned the issue of immigration in his legacy.

if you call yourself a Republican and dont support W then get the hell out of our party.

As soon as Barack Obama’s election was announced, Russia began rattling its sabre, threatening missiles in the Baltic and claiming Alaska for its own. Al Qaeda launched a major attack in Mumbai. We’ll see more of the some, certainly; Joe Biden (incredibly) was not wrong about this.
What it demonstrates is that the world’s leaders, and especially the world’s bad guys, respect George W. Bush. They did not do these things on his watch, because they’d learned the hard way that his responses had teeth. We’ll know some measure of what we were spared during his administration by the incidents that will follow in the coming months — and if Obama responds weakly, then we’ll learn the full measure of what we were spared, the hard way.
George W. Bush did plenty that deserves criticism: spending out of control, well-intentioned but wrong-headed education policy, expanding the federal medical bureaucracy, a poor approach to immigration, and the failure to use the veto pen over such abberations as McCain-Feingold. His worst failure was his complete inability to sell his agenda to the American people; he was entirely the hockey puck of the leftist media.
However, historians will note his success at protecting the nation during a particularly dangerous era; and if my expectations about Obama turn out to be correct, we’ll get a very, very clear picture of how well Bush protected us from the negative image of how poorly Obama will.
philwynk on November 30, 2008 at 8:30 AM

Yes. And I believe your post is every bit as frightening as it is accurate. But for the sake of ourselves and our country I will of course pray that you and I are both very wrong.

That said, Bush did some good things. Bush did some crappy things.

I’m most thankful for no terror attacks since 9/11.

I’m mighty angry about the spending spree that happened with his blessing. That will hurt my kids.

I don’t believe that the situation will get any better with Obama at the helm. All great reasons for limited government.

Illegal immigration was a problem long before Bush: you’re conveniently forgetting that President Reagan (even though we love and honor him) gave over 3 million outright amnesty and many more took advantage of it.

Jenfidel on November 30, 2008 at 6:00 AM

It’s a worse problem now though. A scapegoated racial majority is about to be replaced and soon to become a scapegoated racial minority.

Tired of coworkers calling you a repuke? Rethuglican? Have to refute President Bush on his way out the door? Do you feel better now?

broker1 on November 29, 2008 at 11:46 AM

That has a lot to with why Bush and other elected Republicans went left. Bush’s entire second term was geared towards gaining love from the perverts at the NYT and WaPo.

For the past eight years, the media have shown a hostility to President Bush that could only be compared to their hatred and loathing of Reagan

Consider that those who have experienced the (economic)wrath of Reagan have pushed for a prompt end to his ideology. They have nearly all of that in their hands. For their efforts, they have been rewarded.

What it demonstrates is that the world’s leaders, and especially the world’s bad guys, respect George W. Bush. They did not do these things on his watch, because they’d learned the hard way that his responses had teeth. We’ll know some measure of what we were spared during his administration by the incidents that will follow in the coming months — and if Obama responds weakly, then we’ll learn the full measure of what we were spared, the hard way.

George W. Bush did plenty that deserves criticism: spending out of control, well-intentioned but wrong-headed education policy, expanding the federal medical bureaucracy, a poor approach to immigration, and the failure to use the veto pen over such abberations as McCain-Feingold. His worst failure was his complete inability to sell his agenda to the American people; he was entirely the hockey puck of the leftist media.

However, historians will note his success at protecting the nation during a particularly dangerous era; and if my expectations about Obama turn out to be correct, we’ll get a very, very clear picture of how well Bush protected us from the negative image of how poorly Obama will.

Professor Blather on November 29, 2008 at 10:35 AM

Once again, the good Professor digs in his cleats, and knocks it out of the park.

Thank you Professor Blather for your wise words, and thank you President Bush for staying true to yourself despite the putrid pundits and fair-weather friends.

Godspeed, sir.

A faux conservative monkey boy if ever there was one.

Charming take, Ares.

He has no values at all – he simply does what he is told..

Told by whom?

He expanded government spending beyond all sense,

What does this mean, exactly?

started the Iraq war which has proven to be a monumental waste of life and treasure,

Again, disagree–the Iraq front of the war has been highly successful and has involved a minimal amount of both blood and treasure.

and given succour to illegal immigrants.

Illegal immigration was a problem long before Bush: you’re conveniently forgetting that President Reagan (even though we love and honor him) gave over 3 million outright amnesty and many more took advantage of it.

And those are just his headline ‘achievements’.

Bush has been a monstrous disappointment.

Ares on November 30, 2008 at 5:21 AM

President Bush has served well in the past 8 years and History and real Americans who aren’t filled with bitter and unreasonable hate will agree.

He has no values at all – he simply does what he is told.. He expanded government spending beyond all sense, started the Iraq war which has proven to be a monumental waste of life and treasure, and given succour to illegal immigrants. And those are just his headline ‘achievements’.

Bush has been a monstrous disappointment.

And Texas. And Oklahoma.

unclesmrgol on November 30, 2008 at 1:19 AM

Interesting. As a life long resident of Texas (with an American History background from college, no less), this is the first time I’ve seen this suggested. What is it that you know that the rest of us Texans’ don’t?

Thanks.

Care to provide some examples of Bush’s lawlessness.

I mean, the demorats have been trying desperately for 8 years to pin anything on Bush. They even held mock impeachment hearings.
Kini on November 29, 2008 at 2:06 AM

The DEMS would hardly impeach Bush for aiding them politically and demographically by selectively enforcing border and immigration law. Bush’s open border policy fed the motor voter demographic that helps DEMs. Even if Bush’s moves were no longer needed, the DEMs would still not impeach him on this issue, because it would insult the new demographic that proved so useful in the recent election, and that they are counting on for the next.

Ultimately the buck stopped at the chief executive. Impeached or not he set the most dangerous precendent, deciding the Executor of the law has the right to select which laws he will enforce

There is no question he had decided it was for a higher good

Bush is indeed our highest elected Vigilante

what a shame

Care to provide some examples of Bush’s lawlessness.

The border between Mexico and America, the actions of the INS, the persecution of Border Agents who try to control the law breaking

the head of Homeland Security threatening that he might soon have to start enforcing the law on border control (and still retaining his job under Bush)

The pretense of the construction of the Fence at the border

The diversion of funds to build the fence to slow the construction

The dog and pony show of prosecution of a few select businesses for employing illegals, during which prosecutions, the illegal employees are released to continue being ‘illegals’

I can find a bunch of illegal and improper acts by the Clintons, from the misuse of FBI files, to improper campaign comtributions, to lying under oath about an affair, and a whole bunch of legal but despicable acts by the Clintons, like allowing intercontinental ballistic technology to be transferred to China etc

However, nothing can match the blatant interference with law and order at the border by Bush and his blatant encouragment of hiring illegals in all businesses, and his games played with dog and pony fines and raids to pretend to the public he was enforcing the law, when his own deputy admitted on his behalf that they were not enforcing the many many laws on this issue.

Bush did something that exceeded the petty and personal corruptions of the Clinton administration, and exceeded IMHO the dangerous mistakes of the Clinton administration in handing out technology to equalize the world balance.

Bush decided that our border was not to be protected, despite his Presidential oath to the contrary. He blatantly had his agents restrict enforcement. He made a decision to ignore and defeat an entire body of law because he did not like it. He acted through his agents to punish government employees who tried to uphold the law.

Bush could have wirked to legally end the border control laws. However the laws stand because the public wants these laws. So Bush and like minded politicians made a decision to keep the laws but ignore them preferentially.

This is something Bush can take credit for and it is as bad as can be for our nation.

If Clinton started a trend that ‘oral sex’ is not really ‘sex’

Bush has begun the trend that a President must ignore and thwart the enforcement of laws he disagrees with

This makes the friendly Bush the more dangerous man to hold the national trust