<p>Al Neuharth’s View</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003546943[/url]”>http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003546943</a></p>
<p>HISTORY BOOKS</p>
<p>Whatever partisan debates happen on CC, the greatest odds are with George W. Bush being seen by historians as being one of the worst presidents ever and Clinton being considered middling – neither great nor awful. </p>
<p>I think Bush’s presidency will be viewed through the following prism, probably chiefly:</p>
<p>"Often, they say, it’s the times that make the man. George Bush presided over the post-9/11 era, a time when many for quite awhile were inclined to rally around him and, when doubts may have existed, given him the benefit of those. </p>
<p>Had he met the very difficult challenge of what the rise of Islamic fundamentalist-driven terrorism meant for the US and the world with a well thought out and multi-pronged approach that was perhaps reminiscent of the Cold War in the scope and the multifaceted strategies of those eras, he could well have been thought of the architect of US’ post 9/11 era national security regime, much like Harry Truman’s Administration was following WWII.</p>
<p>Instead of seizing this moment where so much was at stake and where he was granted so much credence by the people of the US, he embarked on a war that some at the time, and increasingly many over its course, considered to be unnecessary and diversionary. </p>
<p>It should be noted that it is true also many did view the war initially as worthy; many believed the president in his argument for war and, driven partly by an effort to rally around the president in unity following the shocking 9/11 attacks, the Congress voted overwhelmingly to support it. </p>
<p>Likewise it should be noted that many were just confused regarding the purposes of our going to war, since the rationale for the war was shifting (sometimes to promote democracy, other times to stave off the development of Iraq’s nuclear weapons program) as well as actively misleading (there were strong ties between Saddam and Osama).</p>
<p>Whatever one believes regarding the rightness of the Iraq War, though, Bush Jr.'s Administration was thought to have demonstrated carelessness and incompetence with regard to the prosecution of the war. Much more quickly than prudence dictated, President Bush appeared before a banner celebrating the winning of the Iraq War (Mission Accomplished). Calls by important generals for more troops to be used in Iraq from the beginning of the conflict had been actively ignored by the headstrong Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and others in the Bush Administration. Numerous tactical mistakes were made including blanket de-Baathification of the country’s army and government, lack of securing porous borders with Iran and Syria, and so on.</p>
<p>Though he was re-elected for a second term… [you get the picture]</p>
<p>And difficulties on the war prosecution front were met by corresponding instances where he was seen to have failed on the domestic front: Katrina, spiraling budget defecits, etc. [you get the picture].</p>
<p>By the end of his presidency, Bush’s approval ratings among the American people rivaled those of Richard Nixon…[you get the picture]."</p>
<p>History tends to write large the successes and failures of presidents when they occur during monumental times. Clinton did not have his presidency in monumental times. Bush did – and he’s failed the test. He’s one of the worst we’ve ever had.</p>