Inode, I have no doubt that Bush's actions prevented further acts of terrorism against America. Iraq became a quagmire after a while, but then Bush focused on cleaning that up and leaving things relatively stable there for Obama. And in my opinion, the actions we took in Iraq and Afghanistan is helping to spark revolution among pro-democracy dissidents in Iran, Egypt, and Libya. Those are the kind of results that reflect strong principled leadership.
Bush's domestic policy, however, leaves a lot to be desired. The prescription drug benefit was probably a good thing for seniors, but it also reinforced the two biggest entitlement programs on the federal budget, Social Security and Medicare, and ensured that federal spending will forever spiral out of control.
Can't do that while also fighting two wars and arguing for preserving tax cuts. You just can't ... unless you argue that "Deficits don't matter." Good one Cheney, now the Democrats will have a field day with their recklessness.
Katrina was a big mess. Lots of blame to pass around, from the local to state to federal level, but when it goes that far up the chain, the buck is going to stop with Bush.
Then there's the collapse of real estate and the financial institutions, which not only happened under Bush's watch, but also arguably happened thanks to policies that were endorsed by Bush just as much as they were endorsed by Chuck Schumer and Barney Frank.
And of course, Bush failed to reform SS.
So if anything, Bush's presidency was far from a "huge success." If anything, George W. Bush suffered the same fate as his father, George HW Bush. Strong foreign policy, but mediocre domestic record.
Tenchusatsu |
