Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Joel Mowbray :: Townhall.com Columnist
Bush was right the one time it mattered most
by Joel Mowbray
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Perhaps the best metaphor for Bush’s aloofness was when then-White House spokesman Scott McClellan repeated what our Commander-in-Chief said while staring out from Air Force One at the Katrina-caused wreckage below, “It’s devastating, it’s got to be doubly devastating on the ground.” For the bulk of two years, while the country was dealing with an ever-worsening war and a devastating natural disaster, Bush was the flyover president, looking down on us from 30,000 feet.

It was at his nadir that Bush rebounded to provide the kind of leadership that justifiably earned him admiration in the aftermath of 9/11. Licking wounds and cutting losses is the path most would have chosen following two dreadful years on the battlefield and a serious thumping at the ballot box. But not Bush.

Had Bush’s decision to deploy 30,000 more troops and significantly overhaul strategies and methods not worked, his legacy would have suffered accordingly. The “surge,” though, did work. And it succeeded better than anyone could have anticipated.

Many conservatives have correctly noted that Bush deserves real credit for keeping the homeland secure for seven years after 9/11. In the weeks and months after the attack, few Americans believed we could stave off another major strike for so long. But the absence of something—no matter how bad that something is—is generally not memorable after time elapses. And as Charles Krauthammer has noted, President Obama now backs many of the security measures Candidate Obama had opposed, meaning our successful-so-far counterterrorism strategy could stretch a few more years, if not longer.

The financial crisis and the mammoth government reaction could have long-lasting ramifications on markets, but Bush was truly just one of many hands on deck. He was on the same train as most in the elite classes, and there is little in the sweeping measures that actually bears his fingerprints.

Ultimately, the biggest factor in fashioning Bush’s legacy could be that the framework has already been established, whereby recent presidents are remembered first and foremost for foreign policy achievements: Nixon going to China, Carter allowing the Ayatollah to topple the Shah of Iran, and Reagan defeating the Evil Empire.

Though this chapter in Iraq’s history is not yet complete, the plot has already enjoyed a once-unfathomable turnaround—and there should be no doubt as to the author.

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Joel Mowbray, who got his start with Townhall.com, is an award-winning investigative journalist, nationally-syndicated columnist and author of Dangerous Diplomacy: How the State Department Threatens America's Security.

Be the first to read Joel Mowbray's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

TIME WILL TELL--NOT SNOTTY-NOSED LIBS
Oh, here we go again:

Just try to compliment George Bush:

Even when the TRUTH is reasoned out with solid FACTS, the liberals respond with FALSENESS AND EMOTIONS!

oh, how the Media love emotions...it really SELLS!

ROWDY BOOTS

worth it?
If in 10 years, Iraq ends up being some form of democracy (of course Iran already is one -- and "democracies" are not always "good") that is stable that could be good in some ways. People who lived in 5 years of terrible violence, without water, electricity, and deaths of familiy members might not think so. The Christain Iraqis -- by 2020 will probably be almost completed dead or out of the country won't think so either.

Why do people not take to task that Bush fired an advisor who suggested in late 2002 that Iraq could cost us $100,000,000,000? Why don't some alleged conservates criticize the fact that it turned out that Bush spent 20 times that amount. Why nobody cares that Bin Laden is still on the loose is also unfortunate.

If Bush's goal was to spend lots of money on Iraq so that blackwater, Halliburton, et al could make lots of money -- then he did accomplish a lot.

By the way, if that money had not been spent (and dedicated toward Iraq) and instead we used $250,000,000,000 to specifically go after Bin Laden himslef, and $250,000,000,000 toward building a stable Palestinian state -- we would have about $1.5 trillion left over and our economy might have been able to handle some of are current woes.

On that note, I guess a Republican still would have had a shot in 2008 too.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.