Yesterday I posted Treatment of Bush a disgrace.
It’s main points as made by a WSJ op-ed contributor:
Mr. Bush has endured relentless attacks from the left while facing abandonment from the right. …The post has drawn a number of comments. If you haven’t already, I encourage you to read the comment thread.
It seems that no matter what Mr. Bush does, he is blamed for everything. He remains despised by the left while continuously disappointing the right.
Yet it should seem obvious that many of our country's current problems either existed long before Mr. Bush ever came to office, or are beyond his control. …
The treatment President Bush has received from this country is nothing less than a disgrace. The attacks launched against him have been cruel and slanderous [.] …
Our failure to stand by [Mr. Bush] has shown to the world how disloyal we can be when our president needed loyalty -- a shameful display of arrogance and weakness that will haunt this nation long after Mr. Bush has left the White House. …
I want to post one of the comments here on the main page, say some things to the commenter, and then invite the commenter to respond with the promise I’ll post in full what he says on the main page.
From Ken in Dallas, a JinC Regular whose comments have added much to this blog:
I live in Texas so I had some knowledge of George Bush before he became President.*************************
As much as I admire his moral character and steadfastness, I felt he was ill prepared to lead us in Washington. He thought he was still in Texas where everyone got along. And then he forgot who elected him. All he had to do was reach across the aisle for the support of the Conservative wing of the Republican party....too difficult for a "compassionate conservative" I guess.
After his signing of the McCain-Feingold bill, the prescription drug monster, the Harriett Miers fiasco and then the incoherent statements made on network television on the CIR Act, I finally threw in the towel.
I'm sorry for the man but the ridicule was self induced.
President Bush has certainly made mistakes; and ridicule and very sharp criticism of any President are to be expected.
But my reading of the WSJ’s op-ed is this: the attacks on President Bush went way beyond typical rough political back-and-forth.
Sure, the Miers nomination, to take an example, was ill-conceived and very poorly handled by the WH when her name went to the Senate.
Criticism from both sides of the aisle and MSM was to be expected. Most of it that I saw was within the bounds of reasonableness.
But we’ve also had the “BUSH=HITLER” bumper stickers, the assassination jokes, and Dem Rep. Pete Stark, a friend and ally of Speaker Pelosi, standing on the House floor saying the President liked to see our troops in Iraq “have their heads blown off.”
Who’s forgotten Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 and its theme that President Bush knew in advance of 9/11, but let it happen because of his family’s connections to Saudi oil figures, including the bin Laden family?
Or that at Fahrenheit 9/11’s DC premiere many congressional Dems were in attendance and applauding?
Then came the Dems’ 2004 convention: Moore was seated in the Dems’ Honor Box alongside the equally “honorable” former President Jimmy Carter.
There are many more examples of disgraceful treatment of the President I could point to, but I’ll leave off doing that for now.
Ken, your past comments have indicated you’re a smart, fair person. Most people who comment here impress me that way, too.
So I’m responding to you and all others who may have read Treatment of Bush a disgrace.
I want to be sure I’ve left no doubt what I meant was disgraceful about the treatment President Bush has received from many leading Dems, their media flunkies, and their millions of followers.
They’ve been active, loud and reckless practitioners of what I’m talking about, while some GOP have abetted that treatment with their silence or confirming “whispers” or just plain “make a buck” shilling a la Scott McClellen.
Such treatment, unrelenting these past eight years, has been grossly unfair to the President and made the reasoned working of our democracy more difficult.
By stirring the passions and paranoia of the unstable, it’s placed the President’s safety and the safety of those who protect him at greater risk than they already face.
I’m sorry to say it will very likely “haunt this nation long after Mr. Bush has left the White House.”
Now it's your turn if you care to respond, as I hope you do.