Roger L. Simon: Bush and history

I have been spending my day working on my book (between Pajamas phone calls and emails) and planning in the back of my head to write a post on Bush and history. Now I see that my colleague and friend Richard Fernandez has done just that - and said everything I was planning on saying in his usual eloquent manner. Go read him. I'm going to pour myself a martini.

Comments

Comments require registration through TypeKey. Abusive remarks may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Roger Simon.

All this people treating Obama as the second coming and the fanatic fervor of the slow speed chase...

BTW If I vote for Obama secretly hoping to bury the reverends JJ and the fatman (wink wink) I might not be 'wasting' my vote.

I mean wouldn't those two have a hard time justifying any facetime? ... ever ever (voice pitch rising ala Micheal Jackson)

Hillary could not 'touch' Obama last night for the same reason OJ could be hardly touched at Gretna Green.

George Bush will be remembered as a Great President. He has corralled that ridiculous post 2006 Congress; he rid the world of Saddam, and awakened the Middle East; he has managed the US's economy so that you have had 8 years of wealth while running a war around the world, and recovered from 9/11.

"a surprisingly triumphant progress through Africa"
"history assigns values based on effects"
"whether for good or ill"
"there'll be numbers at the bottom of the page"

Insted of the backdrop of a recent president
I want to use the american experience as the ever present backdrop.

Obama is the quientesential elephant in the room.
The one one we dare not call an elephant! The one one we vowed our heads to, and wish for 'good or ill' desert mana, he calls it "change" and tells us to "hope" for it.

I use to think a Global Lincoln for women but I think it is more encompassing then that.

My family, a proud family survived la dictadura de el jeneralisimo Rafael Leonidas Trujillo. para que? para que mi padre escapara y tuviera que escuchar a una mujer senicienta quejarse de el pais que nos diera otra vida segunda y mejor?

I try to explain 'nuance' to my dad and he snaps back in English - you don't think i don't understand what they are saying? (a double negative)

How do I explain to my father that its ok for some people to resent the good life afforded them free of bloodshed?

my question is
How many people do the NYT have trying to unearth the thesis of our furer wives imperious leaders?

Here we have people who would move heaven and earth to find out, find out (dig) what a Supremes prospecter has ever (ever, pitched ala MJ) written.

And here they are asking us to vote (scratch that) asking us to give money and not mention (hide - look the other way) what they thought a few short years ago so called thesis for the sake of getting in...

We have bombed Iraq sinse 1992 - The way I look at it, tememos una deuda que no se cubre asta lo prometido.

Borges, Jorge Luis - you want me to worship, you want me to faint? you want me to be proud of words?

Roger I don't know if you read comments on your blog, but if you do could you please explain why you publish the comments of the antisemitic British writer Geoffrey Wheatcroft on Pajamas Media?

I think history will be kinder to Bush than his present day critics have been. Often times the people who criticize him the most are his opponents, who have tried and failed to beat him down...or his sometimes treasonous supporters who seemed to forget he does not work for them.

So Peggy Noonan and Chucky Schumer will be proven wrong. The press of course has been relentless in its attacks on Bush, much as the press of its day was relentless in its attacks on Lincoln.

Now, on the other hand, if Obama brings down the price of gas, turns the Middle East into a bastion of peace and plenty, deals with illegal immigration by turning Mexico into a Spanish speaking Canada while at the same time killing trade with them, and in general creates his Utopia we might actually see the critics proved right.

I think Bush is a man who dealt with the world as it is, rather than as he wants to pretend it is.

Now, we can sit back and watch President Obama attend his first Death to America rally on TV.

Nice link Roger; I particularly enjoyed the comments there. For everybody that badmouths Bush's "mistakes" and "stubborness" in not changing strategies quickly enough in Iraq, I urge them to read a book on WWI (Keegans, for example) to see a compilation of staggering death tolls caused by poor strategies and unwillingness to budge from ill-suited plans. Not to minimize the impact of the sacrifice of any lives in Iraq (even to that bitch Sheehan's family) but the numbers are miniscule historically speaking and the main complainers reveal themselves as ignorant.

I'm not sure what the historical consequences will be from the Bush presidency, but I do understand the comparisons to Lincoln. Leading the nation in wartime with a citizenry split on the merits and effects of battle is no recipe for popularity.

Bush's actions have had to be discerned through the caustic cacaphony of the press (whose objectivity and fairness was clearly displayed by the NYT's gossipy hit job on McCain) and of Democrats frustrated by Gore's contested defeat. Bush is the all-purpose blamee, for everything from hurricanes and earthquakes to Islamic hatred of America. He lacks the gift of oratory to burnish his thought and image. His Texas persona irritates urban centers and brahmin bloodlines who view government as their personal fiefdom. He's a great target for comics and columnists.

He's given little credit for his aid in Africa, for sending carriers and planes to Thailand with medicine, food, water, and trained personnel after the tidal wave, for his stability of intent in a fractious time, for his vision-thing of spreading freedom, and for his stewardship of a wounded nation after 9-11. AQ had been attacking us for years, and they're coming whether Bush is president or not. Putting our troops in the field will play out for both good and ill, and we don't yet understand all the long-term effects. We do know we have adversaries. Bush believes his nation is worth defending.

For myself I think he's a better president than he now appears and I support protecting the US against Islamic terrorism.

February 22, 2008: Bush and history

Comments

Post a comment

Email This Post