His legacy? I dunno, what’s Chester A. Arthur’s legacy?
It’s always disappointing when people can’t see past their own political biases.
One of my earliest political acts was to vote for Clinton over Bush in 1992. In retrospect it was a mistake, not because Clinton was a bad president (he wasn’t) but because Bush was ultimately more effective. He got a lot done for a single-term president, including NAFTA and Gulf War I. He was president during a potentially tricky time with the fall of the USSR (and the August Coup), the Berlin Wall, and reunification of Germany. He was the perfect president for those times, though he did use the unfortunate phrase “New world order.” Even some of his flops, like the interdiction in Somalia, were driven by a desire to make the world a better place.
There is no doubt that he did what he thought was best for the country, even to his detriment. He backed off his famous “No New Taxes” pledge because he deemed the debt too large to ignore. His policies helped lead to the short-lived Clinton surplus. Yet this almost certainly cost him the election with Clinton (I believe it was part of my own reasoning at the time.) I’m having a hard time coming up with a similar example of a politician knowingly torpedoing his own career for the good of the country.
He was far from perfect. The Willie Horton ads were disgraceful; the more recent harassment allegations are troubling. But he was largely a good and honorable man. It was Bush who apparently started the tradition of leaving a note for his successor. He is (so far) the only one to leave a note for someone who defeated him. If every politician had his grace and humility DC would be a much better place. He deserves every accolade he is receiving.
There is absolutely no poisoning of the well in his post. He makes no comments that would imply anything bad about any subsequent poster if they disagreed.
He has no requirement to hold back, as one is supposed to reveal one’s own opinion in the first post of a thread. Not doing so is heavily frowned upon.
I remember reading this article back in 2000 arguing that HW was the best US president since 1960 and finding it pretty persuasive. Re-reading it today, it still makes sense though today I would put Obama above HW.
You tell 'im BigT!
That’s not how poisoning the well works. In general, people don’t like to disagree, so if the first person sets the conversation out from a hardcore position, it tends to prevent everyone with a more moderate position from saying anything and propels those who are hardcore on the other side to jump in and take the conversation to crazy town.
Harassment allegation?
If you mean last years attempt by some C-listers to hitch themselves to #metoo? To the movements credit, it recognised it for what it was, an old man no longer in control of his mental and physical faculties.
No, it was something he did when he was middle aged and later. The articles were just saying, “Yeah, maybe he did something creepy. But a) the dude’s gonna be kicking it any day now, and b) times was different, ain’t no use flogging this particular horse.”
It does sound like, in his mind, it was just a silly thing. He had no sexual/creepy intentions - he’d do it in front of his wife or anyone else - and just no one ever told him that it wasn’t coming across right.
Bush in 1988 was the only Republican nominee for President whom I ever supported. But that was when I was less cynical than now, and inclined to dismiss reports that the Reagan team had secret talks with Iran to delay hostage release in 1980. and that George Bush played a key role in that treason.
Setting aside lingering doubts about the Iran hostage snafu, concerns about the close relationship between the Bush family and the evil House of Saud, and Bush family investment in the munitions industry, Bush was clearly the best Republican President since Ike. It is staggering to contrast Bush-41’s intelligent pro-America policies with the pandering greeds and hatreds of the present Republican Party.
No. The original allegations were from when he was in his 90’s. After that others “came forward”, and claimed that he had “inappropriately touched them”, in the late 90’s during a photo op. Yeah sure lady, he tapped your ass, while in front of multiple cameramen and your husband. Of course it was on purpose! :rolleyes:
Frankly, if a person is a politician with all the pictures taken over the years, I would be amazed if they did not accidentally touch where they shouldn’t have. The normal procedure is, a member of the public comes up, poses with the politician, who puts their arm around them, snap, moveon, next! Now do this a 100 of times in a day. Multiple times a year. For decades. A lot of the Franken allegation were similar.
I see Vox is trying its hardest to flog this though.
Cecil Adams looked into the claim that GHWB had an affair with a State Department employee named Jennifer Fitzgerald (dubbed “George’s Jennifer”, in reference to Gennifer Flowers, who was claiming to have had an affair with Bill Clinton), and found the evidence unconvincing.
I tried to find that Straight Dope column - is there a way to search the archive?
Here you go, just try a few different Google Searches: What was the rumor about George Bush’s alleged marital infidelities? - The Straight Dope
I’m pretty sure that it’s something he’s been doing forever.
(But not any more!)
A very minor and not particularly relevant point, but Allende almost certainly committed suicide during the bombarding of La Moneda.
He was a great man and a brave veteran. I disagree with many of his politics, but that doesnt mean I don’t respect the man.
Let’s see- Allende commited suicide, and Bush was then Chairman of the GOP, in no position to assassinate a foreign leader. Boy are you doubly wrong.
Letelier
Bush is getting the saint treatment now that he’s died. But I remember him very well and do not subscribe to any greatness as president. I’m particularly bemused by the praise for his 1000 Points of Light, which was roundly ridiculed at the time. Seriously, if were so great, he would have been a Democrat.
But silly was the extreme I remember some people going to. I had a friend in Albuquerque who made sure to keep his passport up to date in case he had to flee, convinced that Bush’s “jackbooted thugs” were going to kick in his door any night and drag him away. (Of course, if something like that had happened, I’m not sure how much good his passport sitting in his dresser drawer would have done him, but I felt it best not to make him excitable.)
He was the last professional politician to be President. He had held a host of jobs under various administrations. He was in no way a political novice when he got to Washington, D.C. I thought that stood him in good stead. He got the shaft in 1992 when the combination of a brief economic downturn, combined with the egotism of Ross Perot, cost him his address at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
He wasn’t a great President, but he wasn’t a bad President. I love the reference upthread to Chester Alan Arthur.
How was Bill Clinton not a professional politician? Prior to being elected president, he was a State Attorney General and a Governor.
For that matter, Barack Obama pretty much fits that definition as well, State Senator and then US Senator before becoming president.
Both of them were lawyers as well, but that’s a typical pre-political career for people who eventually go into politics, as contrasted by the less typical businessman route taken by George W Bush, who also had a pre-presidential political career, so I can understand why one might think of him as less of a “professional politician.”