If there were an Olympic game with a point system for public scorn, George W. Bush would have more gold medals than Michael Phelps. It seems as if he sets a new world record for "not being liked" every week.
Last week, for instance, USA Today reported that Bush's approval rating has fallen to 25 percent, the lowest of all time ("Bush approval rating hits record low," Oct. 7). His disapproval rating was at 70 percent, tying his all-time worst mark. Most surprising of all is that five percent of the population has no opinion on the man! Well, I am not in that five percent. I am in the 25 percent - for at least one day.
Fareed Zakaria recently wrote a Newsweek cover story called "What Bush Got Right" about the things that Bush got, well, right (published Aug. 9). It lasts longer than a sentence or two, too. Zakaria makes a point that I think is important for every American citizen to understand, and that is that when we discuss the Bush Administration's failure, we are really discussing its failures in 2003 and 2004. Bush's Presidency has not been a unilateral Presidency, as he has worked through the international community on a number of occasions to effect change, most notably on Iran and North Korea. The economy is, flatly, not Bush's fault. Few Presidents deserve to have such praise or criticism lavished upon them as that they single-handedly effected great change on the economy. It is definitely not Bush's fault that mortgage companies, banks and consumers engaged in an orgy of greed and irresponsibility.
In 2004, when Bush was running for re-election, one of my high school teachers told me that he wanted Bush to win because if he lost then future Americans would be afraid to make hard, large and controversial decisions due to pressure from the public. I thought that was a bogus argument then, but I accept it now, and that is a significant reason I am proud of Bush. I suspect that Bush's unpopularity is caused primarily through the belief that he led us to war and then mismanaged that war, and the feeling that we must get out sooner rather than later is testament to the public's refusal to believe in the effort.
I'm glad Bush is willing to sacrifice his popularity for the great cause of freedom and stability in Iraq. As you know, the situation there has improved and is worthy of our praise and support; the surge worked; Iraq is far better off today than it was even one year ago. I do not know whether or not Iraq will become a stable country, but I know that we need to support them - and if we do, they are far more likely to achieve their potential than they would be alone. For working toward that goal I think Bush deserves much credit and admiration. I suspect that history will respect him for entitlement reform, the brave call to reform social security and his strong leadership after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack on our soil.
History is not written in a week. I suspect Bush will be seen someday as a man who was faced with a series of events to respond to in a rapid manner and did so the best he could. I think his greatest legacy someday will be in Iraq and especially Africa, where the U.S. has done more in eight years than it had in 50 prior. I think that his reputation will take hard hits some day for his unwillingness to rein in out-of-control spending. I think his legacy on civil liberties will be mixed: praised, and vilified at the same time, although I personally consider it a mixed record with more good than bad and I consider our counter-terror measures reasonable and understandable within their context. Ultimately, I reject the doctrine that Bush's Presidency has been a failure. It has not been. It is more complicated than that.
Be the first to comment on this article!