People will remember this week as a historical one.
This week, a black man, President Barack Obama, became President of the United States. However, I will remember this week, not so much for Obama’s ascendancy, but for George W. Bush’s descent into infamy, and his long painful ride into the sunset.
So for now, let’s forget about Obama for a minute, and look at George W. Bush.
Former President George W. Bush (and I am sure many will rejoice at being able to call him FORMER president), started out his term in the White House riddled with controversy. He won a bitterly contested election that required hordes of lawyers from both the Democrat and Republican parties to argue endlessly over the legalities of counting chads.
Winning this election, and coming to power in such a manner, was already a foretelling of the future. In the same way that Bush came into office, hounded by controversy and ridicule, he leaves in basically the same way.
What happened in his two terms as President is a sad tale at how high, and how low, a President and his country can go. From becoming a leader of a powerful nation with the backing of the civilized world, ready to face the challenges of terrorism after 9-11, the United States and Bush became a financially weakened state, with little to no international support or credibility.
The United States became a hollow shell of what it once was, and what it could have been. Unloved, unpopular and leaving a horrible legacy of debt (the U.S. financial crisis), death (the Iraq War) and disaster (Hurricane Katrina) Bush left office with the largest disapproval rating since Nixon resigned.
It is a wonder he wasn’t forced to do the same, considering how many international and domestic laws his secretive administration may have broken.
The next few months will be very interesting for the many disclosures that will come out, now that that Obama’s more open administration is in power.
I feel sad about Bush. He is a Christian man, very devout in his faith, and with a strong sense that God had put him in power for a reason – to save the world from terrorism. He failed in that task.
Terrorism is as rampant in the world as it was when 9-11 happened. If only that was the only place where he failed. But he failed his country, and the world, financially as well. The world economic downturn took place during his term.
There are debates as to whether he could have prevented it. Nevertheless, it happened during his watch. And as Truman says, the buck stops here.
Ironically enough, Bush has taken to comparing himself with Harry Truman, a Democrat who was an unpopular president during his time, but was redeemed by history and is now widely considered one of the best Presidents the United States ever had. But Bush is nowhere near being a Truman. Specifically because Truman never blatantly violated human rights, which is something Bush’s administration did with impunity, and is clearly his worst legacy.
This legacy of torture is embodied in Guantanamo Bay. A place where Bush made torture and violation of human rights an everyday practice. This is patently against international law. But he did it anyway, using loose legal reasoning by a young legal scholar named John Yoo, as his basis for torture, among others.
Whether or not Bush will suffer the consequences for his actions and decisions remains to be seen. But he will forever have to face the shame of being a failure as President. And that is a punishment which will follow him the rest of his life, and in the history of the world.
In any event, Bush is gone. Obama is here. And the world may be all the better for it.
(Column piece for the Sunstar Davao newspaper)
Popularity: 1% [?]
The historians are yet writing the final book on George Bush’s legacy to US and the world.
What we can’t forget about Bush is that show-throwing incident. First, he was as composed as he is. Second, his presidential aides did not have to shoot or maim the show-thrower without mercy.
Possibly, other historians would want to look at Bush’s legacy in the theoretical framework Kelvin took.
But on the whole, maybe it is difficult to say if was a failure of a president, in the case of Bush. It is unfair since – now and more than ever – US will always pose itself as the world policeman – within and outside the context of September 11.
Kelvin,
At least he left peaceably (and no one ever even felt or feared he would not.) Filipinos rightly join Americans in replacing Bush and rejoicing Obama. But we have our own big problem to take care of in PGMA. She may not leave peaceably or as expected under the Constitution. Lots of people who are not noisemakers or destabilizers see her doing everything in her power to to stay in power. So, for all of Bush’s faults at least he has set a good example for her: Leave when your time has come and quit insulting our intelligence about your true intentions. (Am getting a battery of Size 12 golf shoes with spikes lined up and ready, just in case she follows Marcos and not Dubya…)
Nice ring, full of emotion when you say This legacy of torture is embodied in Guantanamo Bay. A place where Bush made torture and violation of human rights an everyday practice.
So how many instances of torture were conducted by the United States after 9/11? Over three thousand persons tortured? Between a thousand and two thousand?
What are the odds that Abe Margallo will agree to under two hundred persons tortured? If Bencard were to say less than fifty, will anyone agree?
Will you bother to do your own research to be convinced (or to disprove) that the number of the persons tortured is less than twenty? Less than twelve?
karlpopper — well whether he will be historically considered a failure wont be finally determined in our lifetimes i think. In any case though, the damning consensus among most modern day pundits is that Bush has done a bad job at being president, which is sort of sad really. He meant well and tried to do what was right according to his conscience, or at least that’s what i like to think he tried to do. But he failed, and allowed himself to get waylaid by some of his advisors. And the whole world may have to pay for many of his decisions.
DJB – Bush couldnt stay even if he wanted to, i think. it is unlikely anyone in the US government would have let him stay. On the other hand, here in our country, t here are to many people entirely willing to let her stay on as president due to their own self-interests. But in the sense that he did voluntarily agree to leave office, I guess he did present a good example for GMA. If only she were to follow it.
UP n grad – there is a strong consensus that tortue, or what would be considered as human rights violations have become a normal event at guantanamo. Simply keeping the detainees for such long periods of time without trial is already a violation of humanb rights. The issue is not whether many or few were tortured or violated. the issue is that such torture and violations were ALLOWED and accepted practice in the first place. To my mind, there shouldnt be a threshold number of torture victims or whatever it is you are asking me to research for. The fact that torture happened and violations allowed, is already a sad and very tragic legacy of Bush.
____________________________________________________________
But Bush is nowhere near being a Truman. Specifically because Truman never blatantly violated human rights, which is something Bush’s administration did with impunity, and is clearly his worst legacy. KELVIN.
_____________________________________________________________
The upside of blogging is that it is free and writers, (regular or posters) are freer to express their minds. The downside is anyone who has a computer and internet service can unload their piece passing it off as a prudent analysis of present-day political tragedies.
Bush has peacefully turned over the reins of government to President Obama, something which RP has not learned so far. History has yet to judge him for his actions but we have already consigned his legacy to the dustbin of history as a failure. It is like kicking a man when he was already out and down.
The liberal media that have created the devil in Bush is being repeated world-wide without looking at the bigger picture of the administration of the man, many has considered a failure.
The media have their own bias as well as the people behind the surveys. Assuming they reflect the present-day mood, well that same mood be the same after emotions and recriminations have died down and we look at the 8 years of Bush in office from a historical perspective?
Bush or his administration was not the sole cause of the financial meltdown the U.S. is experiencing right now. Both the Republicans and the Democrats have their party cronies and retinue of technocrats that milked and debauched financial institutions of the U.S.
While the U.S. war against Iraq and Afghanistan were not entirely funds out the drains. Money for the war were spent mostly for deployment of troops and therefore paid to U.S. soldiers and went to their spouse/dependents in the U.S and therefore spent domestically. The army provides college funds to those unmarried soldiers who enlisted for the war which they can use after their tour of duty. Some funds-tranche are paid to U.S.contractors which manufacture humvees, tanks, howitzers, missiles and even the RME (ready to eat meals) . Most of these money-wars are spent in the U.S. and therefore spurred the U.S. economy and benefitted U.S. war industries.
Historians will see that the Bush war against terrorism was a response to moslem’s extremists killing of U.S personnel and bombing of U.S. embassies abroad and a deterrent for another 2001 twin-tower disaster.
Historians will see the Guantanamo prisons more humane than the extremists’ method of treating U.S. captives. That of shooting them right on their head, paraded on the streets in
Somalia and then killed, or beheaded or asked them to be ransomed with U.S. dollars.
Guantanamo prisoners are being clothed and fed, allowed to hire their lawyers and argued their case before the U.S. courts. Their being tortured are reported in the U.S. Press and their grievances are being debated in U.S. Congress. Never such institution a or opportunities are offered to captured U.S. soldiers. They are simply shot on their heads or beheaded and dumped on the desserts.
i mean dumped on the desert. :)
JCC- I respect your point of view, even if it seems to me a (quoting you now) “piece passing [it] off as a prudent analysis of present-day political tragedies.”
But everyone is entitled to their own point of view, and I can understand that supporters of Bush would not be willing to take the damage that he has done and his vilification lying down.
I am reminded of the Fox news coverage on inaguration day where they focused not on Barack Obama’s swearing in, but on Bush leaving office. Their cameras honed in on Bush walking to his helicopter, leaving the white house, going to Texas, being an ordinary citizen. News about Pres. Barack was virtually non-existent.
In the same way that Fox will have to learn to live with a President barack Obama, and sooner or later, admit that Bush made a lot of mistakes (condoning torture, foremost among them), I think other bloggers or Bush biased bloggers will have to wake up to the reality that, well, their guy screwed up.
A quick admission here: i liked George W. Bush, and idolized him in the beginning. he was a religious man, who managed to rise from his situation (drunk, C-student) to become President of the U.S. His was an inspiring story, and I even bought books about him (The Faith of George W. Bush) and his biography (A Charge To Keep).
Realizing that Bush had done very badly in his term took a while for me as well.
In any case, thank you for your opinion.
Kelvin,
Argue your position from the facts I have mentioned and not dismissed it because I was pro-Bush Republican. :)
Kelvin,
obviously you have swallowed hook-line-and-sinker the liberal media bias without toning it down with the conservative bias. in other words, it was one way bias. :)
Obama is here. And the world may be all the better for it.
It’s a little too early to tell, dont you think?
Well as it seems everyone has their own bias.
Just some points i want to air:
Regarding the ungodly amount of money spent on the war, even if it was supposedly spent on the salaries of soldiers for deployment, i think it is clear that that not all of it beneffited the soldiers.
Much of that money was supposedly paid to the war contractors (i.e. th mercenaries) the weapons manufacturers, and even “intelligence gathering” which is a black hole already from which no money can ever be clearly accounted for. Who knows how much of that money disappeared.
And even if such money did supposedly spur the US economy, well why is the US in such financial trouble now? Perhaps it could be argued that the money did help stave off the recession for a little while, but that money spent on the war could have been spent elsewhere. And besides, in the very first place, that money for the war need not ever have been spent. The war in iraq was already seen to be unneceesary (remember that no WMDs were ever found) and in fact, Iraq was not found to have been connected to the terrorist attacks on the US.
So even if the money spent on the soldiers and war industries supposedly helped the economy, it was spent on an unnecesary war. Which in my book, makes it a big waste of money. Imagine if that money had been spent on keeping the economy afloat instead. maybe then the world wouldnt be in the mess it is in now.
Of course i could be wrong in my reasoning, since I am no economist or even financial expert, but i do beleive that logic seems to indicate that Bush must have done something wrong, or at least his administration did something wrong, so as to leave us in this dire financial situation.
As for the argument of how the detainees are being clothed and fed, while victims of terrorism are simply shot and dumped on the deserts (^_^), I do not beleive that a wrong justifies a wrong. Doesnt that sort of remove the whole point of human rights and the geneva conventions? Doesnt that remove the US away from the very concept of humanity?
Man has evolved into a more civilized creature over the last few years, especially with the emphasis on human rights. The US led much of that evolution. Are you saying that because rogue elements of humanity are off killing people, that the rest of humanity should devolve as well? It seems to me a very specious idea, and would presciely unravel all the progress that the wolrd has made. Imagine if all the armies of the world suddenly started violating human rights, ignoring it, and not respecting rights. The world would be back to the middle ages. That is a path, i think, no nation wants to head down to.
But i can see why many people would want to deal with the terrorists as harshly as they did civilians. What i am basically saying is that, just because they violated human rights, doesnt give others carte blanche to do the same.
Anyway, i must cut this short. Thank you for your thoughts. Healthy debate is always good and enlightens the mind of all those involved.
Thank you for the discussion.
Blogging about the past and talking about other people is not a reality, Obama nor Bush will not make the Philippines rich unless bloggers can blog about a broader view of the situation abroad and domestically that there exist challenges and opportunities.
On Iraq war, how will China protect its refineries and oil investment in IRAQ without US security? China’s armed forces remain second-tier in quality, primarily defensive in their posture. What about the big oil companies such as British Petroleum, Exxon and Shell , who will protect its investment? the iraqi military against its own extremists?
Private sectors have no means of protecting its investment without security forces. There’s still a growing demands of oil in the future.
There’s a window of opportunity now to invest in energy. In the long run, investing today in oil and energy will make the world better and efficient.
Lastly, what’s the connection of US borrowing money from China? Is it really because of financial crisis or a business strategy applied politically?
The US financial crisis review:
“There has been a long term American policy of promoting home ownership ( American dream). This entailed making the financing of home purchases as easy as possible. Various financial institutions were set up over time to make the securing of a mortgage quick and convenient.
In the 1990′s Fannie Mae began to demand that the lending institutions that it dealt with prove that they were not redlining. This meant that the lending institutions would have to fulfill a quota of MINORITY (LOW INCOME) mortgage lending.”
There are plenty of parties to blame for the subprime mortgage crisis, but a large share of that blame rests with Franklin Raines, Timothy Howard and the other members of the inner circle of Fannie Mae.
It just so happen that Bush is sitting in the office while Obama extended many credits to low income families before his presidency. He is pro-poor you know… a socialist that believes everybody should have the same rights and acquire the american dreams. Too bad, since 1990, the bubble has finally burst.
Of course, an inspirational speech is well suited to motivate all minorities to lift their standards and expectations at personal level. Trust me, Obama will not hand you the money. You have to work hard for it.
Well as it seems everyone has their own bias.
In a setting where there is open dialog, such as in FV for instance, bias is not a four-letter word. In fact I daresay that most here appreciate people who are open with their biases.
Kelvin,
Youd want to demand from the U.S. certain standard of civility in the conduct of war but you would not demand the same standard from her enemies. As if human rights can be demanded only by “muslim terrorists” but not by U.S. captives.
Contract personnel in the conduct of wars are provided mostly by American companies and therefore spurred economic activities within the U.S.
BTW, you have not argued Leytenian point that the economic mess was not totally engineered by Bush.
Will you bother to do your own research to be convinced (or to disprove) that the number of the persons tortured is less than twenty? Less than twelve?
But these clearly are regurgitated talking points from many sources bent from day one on bringing down an administration they felt was not qualified, not even legitimate even after accepting that Bush was reelected quite easily on his 2nd term and well after the “quagmire” that the Iraq war had turned into had begun. And reading over the number of pieces now sprouting in media about “their fair assessment of the Bush administration”, this is quite typical, quite blistering on charges but minimal on evidence. And while proof may be provided in other critical pieces, they typically are coming from sources adjudged biased or slanted, take the US MSM as prime example. Now which right-thinking person can doubt the bias of the US MSM?
Thus, I would really like to witness suits being filed against the previous administration, whether domestically or internationally, for all of its alleged grievous sins against humanity and the many “revered” laws and treaties of civil society. It appears to be the only viable path of possible vindication, since the target himself is quite nonchalant about defending himself and his actions.
And Obama himself appears to be following after what Bush did in foreign affairs, this early both in action and appointments. Even the announcement of the closing of Guantanamo Bay is largely symbolic, given that Obama himself does not have a process on how to proceed to take care of the inmates already incarcerated there.
What Obama does and how closely or disparately he veers from Bush “doctrine” is another path for possible vindication of the previous administration.
Let us see how the actions of the man who “shredded the constitution” will be repudiated and changed by the current administration.
Bush’ Legacy – A million dead Iraqis. That’s 300 for every 1 person killed in 9/11.
Kelvin
Who knows? George W Bush may get the best compliment of them all, imitation! Barack Obama may yet turn into a Black Bush! Sorry to deflate your rose colored glasses but Obama is no longer a Democatic nominee but President. He will have to shoot down some of his campaign promises and to the liberal faithful, transmogrify into a Black Bush.
Oh BTW.
This legacy of torture is embodied in 1) Intramuros, 2) Batangas, 3) Bilibid Viejo and so on before we even talk of Gitmo. My great-great lolos were victims of American torture in our War of liberation against the United States!
We forget that waterboarding was invented when the Americans took Manila in 1898.
“Youd want to demand from the U.S. certain standard of civility in the conduct of war but you would not demand the same standard from her enemies.”
jcc,
Right on the eye!
The liberal media is on the roll today, and they better bask while the sun shines for them.
Their biases however is so pervading it suffocates, the road for them to roll on will be short.
In any event, even keen historians are by – logic and necessity – biased as they embraced their own frame of reference.
I would supposed Kevin has himself viewed the farewell speech of President Bush which tells any average reader where he is coming from.
There is no mistaking the position upheld by the man and I found it sound enough.
Perhaps indeed, some in FV are in the vicious habit of trying to ‘outlast’ each other in terms of which school of thought should take higher precedence here.
Blogging is dialogue and debate. Maybe, jcc should understand this first and Kevin next.
It seems this has generated a lot of debate. And I would guess that is the whole point of the Filipino Voices Blog.
I am thankful it has generated this much discussion already. It seems everyone has his own bias and opinion, and it also seems unlikely, given the rhetoric used in the commentaries, that anyone will be able to change anyone else’s mind.
So allow me then to just say that i am happy that the post was able to spark such sharing, and that
at least everyone was able to sound off their point of view.
Almost none of us agreed with each other, with some demanding counterarguments as though it was a right due them. In any case, we each have our points of view, and we all stand by them.
Let us be grateful we are in a position to share our viewpoints without repercussions. Let us also accept that the world, and america is changing, with Bush gone, and Obama now President.
Whether it is changing for the better or for the worse, seems to depend on the person’s opinion.
For now, it seems we will have to wait and see what happens next, and who among us will turn out to be right.
Keep blogging folks.
To JCC and karlpopper and everyone else who commented – thanks for a lively discussion. I look forward to future debate.
Karlpopper/Primer at January 26th, 2009 9:02
Did I not say that blogging is free and therefore everyone is entitled to spew his own mundane idea in this blog?
No. Not in purist terms as in a black and white dichotomy. Normative is the closes point to home.
Here’s the Bush legacy right here:
‘Abandoned many of the war on terror policies’, the article said. Right. Airstrikes in Afghanistan has killed 22 militants and 33 civilians. (http://www.theyoungturks.com/story/2009/1/25/145143/347/Diary/Missile-strike-reality)
Change you can believe in, folks.
I’m one of those trying to be optimistic about a man like Obama being elected into the highest position in what many have called “the free world.” But for now, what stays in mind is that we need to do even more to uphold the good, now that a man like Obama sits as President of the US.
There’s much I don’t know and understand about US politics (politics in general for that matter), and I, too, had been perplexed about former President Bush’s choices regarding the conflict in Iraq.
But I am more perplexed (and irked) by the principles and actions of one who opposed — repeatedly — a legislative measure that aimed to extend legal protection to babies who survive abortions. And one bent on making it mandatory to use taxpayers’ money to pay for abortions performed on women all over the country (and this while the country is experiencing recession).
And when a person tells the American people that one of his goals is to reduce the incidence of abortion, why does he lift the ban on the Mexico City Policy, thereby funding organizations worldwide that promote and perform abortions? I mean, he lifted the ban 2 or 3 days after the inauguration. If he was going to go against his word, wasn’t that doing it “too fast”?
So, the logic behind a declaration such as “Obama is here. And the world may be all the better for it,” is something I don’t see at all.
Karlpopper/Primer;
Please speak english. Here is my opening statement at January 26, 2009 9:51 am.
“The upside of blogging is that it is free and writers, (regular or posters) are freer to express their minds.”
Thus I assumed that everyone has a take on every issue that may come up. Though I hardly consider the exercise a “debate” on an issue. A debate is where the issues are not clear-cut and two opposing sides are trying to win the public or the other to his side. But when one makes a position of his bias and present it as a prudent analysis of the supposed historical perspective for which a regime must be judged, it is quite arrogant to take such position.
Jeg,
In one post I said: “American politics is too complex for ordinary people to comprehend. Obama is not a dove. He is a hawk in dove’s feathers.
sunnyday,
Not heard from you for a while. My eyes see a “curse” the good lord had cast upon the great land of U.S.A. after the liberal politics had get hold of the better ideals of liberty and democracy in America. Liberal politics that see abhorrence of the phrase “Under God” in the pledge of allegiance and “God-given rights” in the Constitution and in “In God We Trust” in the dollar bills. Liberal politics that is discomforted seeing young kids praying at the school or adults praying at football field.
Liberal politics that look at the right of a woman to pull out a fetus from her womb, hold it up high dripping in blood and pronounce to the whole world, that “today we have just exercise our constitutional right to privacy to abort a fetus”.
Katrina came followed by the economic meltdown. I see the hand of God in all of these.
jcc,
What are you now saying? Speak English, if you please.
Maybe, a new view should surface now. Blogging is not free.
And dialogue is not debate. And debate is not dialogue. So why the differing opinions, criss-crossing comments? Why some apparent agreement and disagreement? Speaking English.
I am amazed with it. It is a good thing for my research. Thanks. ^_^