Ranking the Presidents #31

GEORGE W. BUSH (R) - 2001-2009

I'm sure it's too soon to say where he'll ultimately rank. I know some believe he's the worst president we've ever had; others believe he'll be vindicated like Truman. I have a hard time ranking him too high when I look at the state of the country in 2008. He would have had a better legacy had he only served one term.

Bush won a hard-fought campaign by electoral votes but not by popular votes. It wasn't the first time such had happened in US history, but never has an election come down to less than 1000 in one state. As such, Bush did not get a honeymoon phase, with millions in the country crying he stole the election. Then 9/11 happened. In the weeks after that terrorist attack, his popularity hit 90%. The country was behind him. He authorized an attack on Afghanistan, and later, on Iraq. It was a reversal of US foreign policy to pre-emptively strike against Iraq, and it wound up being on largely false intelligence.

While presidents usually raise taxes to fund wars, Bush decided to cut them. He passed the largest tax cut in history. He also passed the biggest budgets and largest deficits in US history (history that would be broken by Obama, but still...)

It was his second term where everything fell apart. The Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts had no end in sight, and were still going after his eight years were up. The Abu Ghraib scandal hurt the US's reputation around the world and started debates between what is torture and what are merely "enhanced interrogation techniques." Bush's slow response to Hurricane Katrina made him seem insensitive to the sufferings of the common folk, and the real nail in his coffin came with the financial collapse in 2008. The government bailed out banks and financial institutions, fearing that to not do so would cause the worst economic depression in US history. The national debt had doubled on his watch, and in the final year of his presidency the US lost an estimated 2.6 million jobs. His approval rating at one point hit 22%, the lowest in history since approval ratings have been recorded, breakign the record set by Truman.

Now with the wave of democratic protests in the Middle East, maybe Bush's legacy will improve, or maybe it'll look better against Obama's if the economy doesn't improve soon. I think it raising to Truman levels is a real stretch. Bush campaigned as a conservative but grew the government with increased spending, and suspended many civil liberties in the name of security. He inherited a recession when he came into office, and after some years of success, he left an even worse recession to the next guy.

My Case for McCain/Palin

I've always said John McCain was my guy in 2000. I think most could look at the country and the Republican party now and say both would have been better off if he had beaten George W. Bush in the 2000 primaries. I voted for Bush in 2000 because I was against Gore.

George W. Bush ran as a compassionate conservative. It turns out that meant was he was socially conservative, fiscally liberal, and diplomatically tone-deaf. No wonder the deficit grew so much.

I voted Libertarian in 2004.

I believe McCain would have implemented some if not all of Bush's tax cuts. I also believe he would have fought back against spending. I believe after 9/11, McCain would have gone to Afghanistan, would not have tried to come up with an excuse to go to Iraq, and McCain would not have announced to the world, "You're with us or against us. Iraq, Iran and North Korea are the axis of evil." We'll never know for sure unless the afterlife has a "What If" Holodeck machine we can play with for eternity. I believe under McCain, Osama bin Laden would be dead by now.

In 2008, there are many reasons for me to vote for Obama. First, I'm in Utah. McCain will win this state by over 20% no matter what. So, more votes for Obama narrows that gap. As long as Republicans control so much, they will continue to take this state for granted, and the Democrats will continue to ignore it.

Second, I do think Obama would send a positive message throughout the world, a world that didn't hate us as much in 2001 as it does now, and most of those in the world who hate America don't really hate the American people; they hate the American government. They hate Bush.

Third, it'd be cool. Two of my kids are from Zambia. How cool would it be to have them grow up knowing a black president?

Every once in a while, a party needs something to remind them who they are and what they stand for. For the GOP, Reagan came along and rescued them. Then they lost it. Then they got it back in 1994. Then they lost it. They lost it by following George W. Bush on everything. There needed to be more questions on Iraq, on the program of pre-emptive strike. Why was the post-strike occupation of Iraq so poorly managed? Why increase the entitlements in Medicare when the deficit is already huge? They did push back occasionally, like the nomination of Harriet Myers to the Supreme Court, but there should have been more.

I think fear of losing power led to their loss of power. They trusted Bush in 2004, and Bush didn't lead. They deserved to lose control of the House and Senate in 2006. In the past year and a half, Bush has wised up on diplomacy and troop levels. He underplays so he doesn't have to admit to many mistakes. Google-search Fareed Zakaria's recent Newsweek article on what Bush is getting right; he did a great concise job of laying it out.

Fifty years from now, I don't think Bush will be considered the worst president in history, which is what many lefties right now believe. I think James Buchanan will always hold that dubious honor, with Andrew Johnson and Warren G. Harding down around there too. Many felt that way about Truman when he left office but decades later, he's viewed as pretty good. History's been kinder to LBJ as well. I'm not saying he'll ever be in the top half. Time will tell.

But with Democratic control sure to remain over the House and Senate, this country would be better off with McCain in charge than Obama.

Watching the GOP convention, this party is ready to reform against itself, ready to throw the bums out (except their own). Gone are Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, Dennis Hastert, Rick Santorum, George Allen. Soon to be gone are Larry Craig and Ted Stevens. With the religious right, Jerry Falwell's dead, Pat Robertson's irrelevant and religious guys like Rick Warren seem more tolerant. (Firm in their beliefs, but tolerant.) I participated in aiding a primary election of throwing out an Republican incumbant to bring in a new guy (Jason Chaffetz) running on fiscal discipline.

Despite how petty the campaigns have become the past few weeks, McCain's demonstrated time and again his ability to compromise and work with the other side of the aisle. This is important. Joe Lieberman got Republicans to cheer Bill Clinton at their convention by point out that hey, Bill worked with you on welfare reform and balancing the budget.

Right now the Dems are running against Sarah Palin, trying to terrify the public that John McCain will die in office and this woman will then have the nuclear codes. But running against a Vice-Preisdential candidate never works. The Dems annihilated Dan Quayle in 1988, but to what end? Besides, Palin was the perfect pick for McCain if he wants to get elected. I can't think of another person who would have energized the base more, with all due respect to Kay Bailey Hutchison. As for McCain dying in office, I keep looking at his 96-year-old mother. And if he did die in office, say at the three-year mark, that's three years of valuable experience Palin would have by then. But the whole experience question is kinda of a joke. Americans like governors as president (Bush 43, Clinton 42, Reagan 40, Carter 39, etc.) and she did more to tackle problems in her two years as governor than Obama did voting the party line in four years in the Senate.