Bush's Legacy:  Unmitigated, Relentless Failure
by William Hessell
7/20/06


Do you need more evidence of how George W. Bush has failed us as President?  Let's briefly count some of the ways.  The list grows almost daily.  I will omit some of the recent diplomatic blunders which are ever-present when he is forced to interact with world leaders, but which speak volumes re: the stature and respect that he and the nation he represents commands.

l) Bush claims he is a uniter, not a divider.  Does anyone seriously believe that the nation, and its citizenry, is more united now than it was in 2000.

2) Bush claims to be a compassionate conservative.  His fiscal policies (debt and deficit) and promotion of an over-reaching federal government are anything but conservative.  His response of Katrina, health care needs, returning veteran's needs, minimum wage issues, reigning in excess profits for essential services like insurance, etc., indicate he is certainly not compassionate (except perhaps in insisting on tax breaks for his wealthy friends and donors).

3) Bush promised a return to morality in government.  He does consistently represent some of the narrow issues of religious fundamentalists, such as opposing abortion, gay rights, stem cell research, etc., but these issues certainly don't speak to the heart of morality.  The government has rarely been more secret, more misleading, less open, less honest, less trust-worthy, more self-serving.

4) Bush has claimed that global warming is only an unproven theory.  Wrong!  The vast majority of scientists, and a growing body of research, strongly support that climatic changes are occurring due to man-made environmental causes that may well have highly detrimental effects on life on earth

5) Bush stated that he would not engage in nation-building overseas.  He broke his policy by occupying and attempting to set up a government in Iraq.  The success of his nation-building endeavor is highly in doubt, as Iraq is engaged in civil strife that resembles the civil war that Bush and his advisors insisted would not break out.  Interestingly, the protestors on the street marching against Bush's Iraqi incursion did know enough of Iraq's history to predict a civil war would result.

6) Bush claimed that democracy would spread in the middle east after the fall of Hussein.  There have been some elections, and each has been characterized by more radical, anti-western factions winning power, in Iran, in Palestine, even in Iraq, where the government is dependent upon our support but the candidates we favored received minimal backing.  Monarchies in the region, which are allied with us, fear holding free elections, knowing anti-western elements would gain strength.  In short, western-style democracy is hardly on the rise in the middle east.

7) Bush's advisors claimed that launching a pre-emptive war could lead to peace, that the display of military strength and superiority would garner respect, even from those who might oppose the action.  Wrong!!  When we entered Iraq, conflict escalated immediately between the Israelis and Palestinians, anti-US sentiments increased markedly in the middle east and throughout the world, and the world-wide support the US commanded after 9-11 and maintained when we fought al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan was lost.  War, however necessary when imposed on a nation, does not in itself produce peace.  An elective war only models aggression as the way to resolve conflict.

8) Bush and his advisors downplayed the significance of the United Nations and our traditional allies, claiming we could "go it alone" if need be to defeat our enemies and to root out the threat of terrorism.  We acted as our own agent, forming a "coalition of the willing", and criticized long-term allies who questioned our policies as belonging to "old Europe".  As the fighting in Iraq continued and tensions mounted from Iran, North Korea, and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict spread to Lebanon, it became clear the US can not go it alone, and the need to repair old and damaged relationships became paramount.  That Bush is not adept at diplomacy and international negotiation is all too obvious, and is probably the under-statement of the year.

9) The centerpiece of Bush's foreign policy, since his 2002 State of the Union speech, has been to fight the threat of terrorism presented by al Qaeda and the "axis of evil" nations which he identified as supporting terrorism, namely Iraq, Iran, and North Korea.  Four years after that speech, al Qaeda has many more adherents than ever, and escalating tensions throughout the middle east and continuing conflict in Iraq provide it with  steady recruiting bases.  The root causes of terrorism are left un-addressed. With Iran and North Korea, in the absence of any direct, sustained attempts at resolving issues with them during the past four years, labeling them as enemies only hardened their position in that role, and the increased threat we now experience through their nuclear and missile developments is a natural consequence.  Few would consider the world a safer place now than in 2002.

10) Bush claims we can handle the challenges we face, whether from terrorists, health care problems, changing world realities, environmental concerns, poverty, etc., without making significant, perhaps difficult changes in how we live.  Go to the mall, enjoy yourself, no need to raise taxes, bottom line is corporate profits and they are up, spend your tax break, stay the course, no cause for alarm, trust your government.  This just may be his greatest failure in leadership--not preparing us for hard choices and changes that are predictable in the future.  We are not yet burning, and hopefully never will, but warning signs are clearly on the horizon.  As with Rome in the days of Nero, is it possible that Bush may bear a similar legacy??