The Bush Legacy

Joe Klein writes an ode to Bush as his Presidency winds down.

In the end, though, it will not be the creative paralysis that defines Bush. It will be his intellectual laziness, at home and abroad. Bush never understood, or cared about, the delicate balance between freedom and regulation that was necessary to make markets work. He never understood, or cared about, the delicate balance between freedom and equity that was necessary to maintain the strong middle class required for both prosperity and democracy. He never considered the complexities of the cultures he was invading. He never understood that faith, unaccompanied by rigorous skepticism, is a recipe for myopia and foolishness. He is less than President now, and that is appropriate. He was never very much of one.

Putting aside my own biases, I have a hard time imagining anyone making any sort of credible defense of Bush's legacy. Yes, his Presidency isn't officially over, yet and time could be more favorable to him (Harry Truman style), but it is still difficult to figure out what a more favorable picture of Bush would even entail. He did actually have a few decent moments (immigration, AIDS assistance in Africa), but when it came to the big things - the response to 9/11 and terrorism, the conduct of Iraq and Afghanistan, torture, the economy, civil liberties - he has been an unmitigated disaster.

Anyone out there care to make an intellectually credible defense of George W. Bush?