Bush: Worst leader since the late Caesars?

"I think we can all agree that these are fascinating times in which to live."

It was not for nothing that the Chinese had a curse: "May you live in interesting times."

The neocons ran the country; not George Bush.
The Israel Lobby wanted to get rid of Saddam. Perle wrote a paper for Israel ("Clean Break") that gave a detailed prescription for stabilization of the region which included regime change in Iraq. Bush had a lot of help to get us into the mess we're in today.

And the economic mess can be blamed on the scumbags of both parties.

Blame the neocons and Israel? If GWB let the neocons run the country, then that's the fault of GWB. If GWB let the Israel Lobby influence his decision to go to war, then that's the fault of GWB.

I hope that Obama wins this election because I think that he has what it takes to clean up the mess of the Bush years. If Obama wins, I hope that the Democrats and liberals behave with more class than the conservatives and Republicans did 4 years ago. The arrogance and crowing of victory from the "values voters"(I still can't utter those words without rolling my eyes and making a sound of disgust from deep in my throat) did nothing but fuel the already over-inflated ego of a man who will be remembered most for his arrogance and stupidity.

Karma. We might think that we can avoid the laws of Karma, but it always seems to come back and bite us in the ass.

Shakespeaean is right--when I saw the video of Bush Sr. breaking down in sobs as he praised Jeb, I immediately thought of King Lear and youngest daughter Cordelia.

It's unusual to witness such an epic tragedy in real time, and I'd be interested to know how the Bush dynasty plays out in literature, in a hundred years or so.

Shocking news: many Americans have consciences. Unfortunately, GWBush and his crowd don't seem to (except Scott McClellan, who left and tried to save himself).

But too much of the press behaved like a bunch of kids in a suburban junior high in both the 2000 and 2004 elections, and allowed the Bushies to manipulate them shamelessly.

The silver lining for me is watching Al Gore, back in Florida, with a whole new level of credibility and finally seen as a deeply decent man. GW Bush is a Cautionary Tale at best.

I would really like proof that we are fighting people over in Iraq so we don't have to fight them here. I'd like actual specifics not throwaway catchphrases! What threat from within Iraq actually imperils the security of Americans on American soil? Or is just that the 9/11 terrorists were Muslim Arabs, just like Iraqis? If that's the logic employed here, then since there's over a billion Muslims in the world, perhaps we should just fight them all?

I'd like to note that I do not support withdrawing our troops right away and I have no problem with using military force to attack actual terrorists or terrorist-harboring regimes. Now that we're in the region, we wouldn't want to leave that part of the world in complete shambles.

It's just infuriating that war hawks pummel skeptics with the ludicrous claim that the same terrorists that operate in Iraq are bent on coming to America and killing civilians here. There is little to no evidence for this assertion! I would expect that, if it were such a obvious problem, there would be mountains of evidence to justify us spending billions of dollars and risking so many soldiers' lives. Point me to it and I'll gladly take a look at it.

Gregory Walker, (not related, as far as I know) I was not aware that Saddam Hussein had any plans to fight us over here. Maybe he was planning to use those weapons of mass destruction that mysteriously seemed to vanish into the desert air, or was considering an amphibious assault under air cover provided by the crack Iraqi Air Force. Please.
It seems evident to all except the willfully blind that a massive military operation followed by occupation is not the most effective method to defang a decentralized network of terrorist cells, but if the only tool one chooses to use is a hammer, all problems begin to look like nails. One more thing, if I may. If I happened to live in Iraq or Afghanistan, and my family had been obliterated by American firepower, I would have a firm idea about just who was "satan's follower". Why, I might even be motivated to go and fight them over there instead of over here. It works both ways, Gregory, unless you're playing Risk.

I am a Christian and conservative, as frustrated as everyone with Bush and his counselors. It is embarassing, and Republicans deserve to lose...however even with the warts and blunders we carry forward into this election, the choices are stark.

Rod, this is the best blog I read. Your ideas stimulating and on target. Thank you for making us think about the choices we make. My question is...How can you not vote? I know you wrote about it.

It is permissible and even virtuous to vote against something even when you are not voting for something. I don't understand....but carry on your good work.

Confession: I'm a proud lib, who believes in a responsible capitalism with safeguards. Sure, I drink lattes.
They're good. So is arugala. So, to all those so called conservatives who ridicule such things -- Palin likes her latte, and she knows greens are healthy, so she's pulling your collective chains when she plays the idiots game because, well, she thinks y'all are idiots. The reason for the silliness -- in a nutshell, the lameness of the republican strategy this election can pretty much be found at the ground zero of lattes' and arugala. Which brings me to W. I remember walking the streets of my former hometown, NYC, during the 2004 fat and pasty faced-cowboy hat wearin' people's convention and thinking -- can't these folks see through the bullcrap? This administration is lying, could give a crap about them, plays to their desire not to know and a failed human being is being touted as a great leader. Look the facts, their they are, look... but alas, too many folks saw OBL under their bed instead. 4 years of utter, astonishing failure and lack of leadership, the gutting of our constitution, the transformation into a torture state. And I'm supposed to give an ear to anyone who says republican is the way too vote this time around. We'll do things differently this time. Bulldung supreme. This nation needs a serious hot coffee enema to flush out the toxins, spiritual as well as material, hoisted upon us by President Cheney and his incurious frat boy stuck in a perpetual hazing.

I don't agree with everything Obama has laid out. But I believe, with him, the cleansing can finally begin.

Yup. The next time you turn around, it will be the Democrats who are the equivalent of Caligula. That's how the system "works", if you call that working.

We've stumbled along here for the better part of 300 years, and I'd be interested in learning about any system that works better, junky though this one is.

Remember Truman, the hated war monger, the failed President that got us mire in an unwinnable war in Korea. Remember also that there have been no successful terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11. Say what you will about President Bush, but my gosh I'm sick of newspaper writers who think they know everything when they've never had to make an important decision themselves. What a business. Tell the whole world how bad other people are, but never once--never once--admit your own wrongs and apologize. Peak Oil anyone?

I'm sorry, I have trouble taking W. seriously as a tragic figure. Maybe an tragicomic figure.

For a classical tragic figure, the president who comes to my mind is Nixon -- a man of very real abilities, undone by his own inner demons. If Nixon had lived and ruled in the 17th or 18th centuries, I think one of the 19th-century opera composers might have written an opera about him (though the opera would probably have ended with his death). Yes, I know John Adams wrote an opera about him, "Nixon in China", but it's not the same thing.

Or Johnson -- who wanted to be remembered for the Great Society, but whose presidency was undone by his determination to wage the war in Vietnam.

W. has always struck me as the kid who insists on trying on his father's clothes and pretending to be his father -- but the clothes don't fit; they are far too big on him.

It's not a particularly original analogy, but I figure the Corleone family from "The Godfather" films is the fictional model for the real-life Bushes. George H.W. (a.k.a. 41) is the patriarch Vito, who tries to teach his sons the rules of the game. George W. (a.k.a. 43) is Sonny, the impulsive hothead who starts a gang war that consumes him. Neil is the hapless Fredo, done in by his own corruption. And Jeb is Michael, the only one who retains some relative dignity at the end.