President George Bush: Frank, please consider filling a post I'm creating. It may mean long hours and dangerous nights, surrounded by some of the scummiest elements in our society.
Lt. Frank Drebin: You want me to be in your cabinet?
- The Naked Gun 2 and 1/2
Nostalgia for ex-president George H.W. Bush and his administration has gotten out of hand. I realize his son has been an unmitigated disaster as president himself, but we really have to keep things in perspective. The father only seems better since everything that the son touches manages to fall apart. There's a reason why the voters gave H.W. the boot in '92...
In the winter of 2004, journalist Tom Frank wrote an article in The New Repbulic basically exploding some of the more recent myths about Bush the Elder. I recommend reading it.
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=express&s=frank122704
Frank makes the case that W is actually a better president than H.W., which I disagree with. I should note, however, that since the article is a couple of years old, some things he mentions ended up being much worse than he thought they would be. His opinion might be different today.
In addition, I think that it is important to raise this issue as people laud not only Bush I, but also James Baker (an overrated political hack) and Brent Scowcroft (an adherent of the "realist" view of foreign policy, who would have no problem seeing thousands die if it doesn't fit in America's national interests...as defined by him).
So I recommend that all those liberals suffering from this nostalgia knock it off and find some real people worth having in the government. Like say the junior senator from Illinois...
4 comments:
Not only is there nostalgia for H.W., but there is nostalgia for bringing Carter back to the White House, too!!!
H.A.,
I was actually going to do a post on Carter soon myself, for the same reasons. I'm interested in what your problems are with him. Do tell.
I actually have no substantial problems with Carter, save that he has been out of politics for nearly 30 years. He is an aging statesman whose glory days are reawakening... He has become so popular lately because he has done so much work with Habitat for Humanity and has spoken vocally against several key GWBush policies.
But we can't forget that this is the same man who had extremely strained relations with Teheran and almost caused a war with Iran in the late '70s. Although this brinksmanship was arguably surpassed by his successor, Carter's administration was fraught with good intentions, but no real substance... kind of like this comment ;-)
Carter presided over an economic downturn, the highest oil prices in history, surpassed only this past summer. I'm also not really sure how effective he was as leader of the West against Communism...
Hopefully, history will remember him for his humanitarianism, and not for his failed four years in the White House.
I agree with all of your points. Just to add on though, Jimmy Carter had a Democratic Congress with which to work, and yet managed to accomplish very little. Why? Because he was too self-righteous to play the political game with other people. In other words, if a fellow Democrat didn't go along with Jimmy Carter it was because he or she was a bad person, not because of a legitimate difference of opinion. Thus, he would not compromise and it turned many people in Congress off.
JC, however, is always in the right, and if he needs to be slightly ruthless to get into power, then so be it. For example, while running for Governor of Georgia, he made implicit appeals to white supremacists and segregationists to get their vote. He let them down while he was in office, but it demonstrated that Carter was willing to do what it took to take power. His flip flops on abortion during the 1976 election is another example. He can do these things, but others cannot.
Post a Comment