# What would it take for George W. Bush to mend his reputation? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 10, 2010, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835 "2010-08-10T16:09:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/61 "2010-08-11T02:32:46Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > …But I notice that you give no weight whatsoever to the [82 of 208 Dem congressmen and 29 of 50 Dem senators](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution) who also voted for it. Or maybe you weren’t aware of it. Whatever… Teach your grandmother to suck eggs. Damn sure was aware of it. I was aware that a hysteria had swept over my beloved country, that madness was abroad in the land. And I was aware that persons of a particular political stripe ruthlessly, relentlessly and cynically exploited that bad craziness for every drop of poisonous political advantage they could squeeze. I also remember that GeeDubya swore up and down that it wasn’t a “go to war” resolution, but a resolution supporting his negotiating position, to offer support for an effort to avoid war. I didn’t believe a word of it. How about you? He also swore up and down that he was not aiming to go to war, that he was seeking a peaceful solution, even as he set in motion the machinery of war as surely as playing Russian Roulette with an automatic. I didn’t believe a word of it. You? “Mistake”, my ass! ---
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/62 "2010-08-11T03:13:45Z")
> [@Typo\_Knig](#): > > Say what you will about him, and heaven knows I have on this board, Shrub did not shirk the duty of visiting the wounded, or the families of the fallen, who served under him. He avoided soldiers in [Arkansas](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gw_bush#Texas_Air_National_Guard). He also avoided [this lady](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cindy_Sheehan), who camped out in front of his Texas home during one of his many vacations. Also, when he did meet people, he made sure those he didn’t want to meet were placed [in special cages away from “his people.”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone) [I like how he pissed on the Constitution.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeJmmQ5y9eQ) [Now watch this drive.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3p9y_OEAdc) ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/63 "2010-08-11T03:20:02Z")
> [@Typo\_Knig](#): > > > [@Superhal](#): > > > > I would expect him to ask Congress to charge him for war crimes, abuse of power, and treason, and to waive any attempt to pardon him by anyone. (Whether Congress does so or not, I would expect them to at least vote on it.) If he is tried, I would expect him to face his punishment (execution, last I checked) with dignity and courage. > > Similar to my idea that Bush should, on his own accord, lawyer up and turn himself into the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague. > > The best answer for Dubya to mend his reputation is to start with [post=9551714]this suggestion.[/post] It isn’t even that much of a stretch for Dubya. Say what you will about him, and heaven knows I have on this board, Shrub did not shirk the duty of visiting the wounded, or the families of the fallen, who served under him. > > Sadly, it seems he’s going to spend his days rattling around his mansion like a loose pea in a pod. Can you believe the soldiers would have been better served by not sending them to a war based on lies? There is no reason for them to be killed and wounded. He is responsible for their harm. ---
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/64 "2010-08-11T03:30:19Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Can you believe the soldiers would have been better served by not sending them to a war based on lies? There is no reason for them to be killed and wounded. He is responsible for their harm. Or, imagine if he was bright enough to have stopped 9/11? How would history have judged him then? ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/65 "2010-08-11T03:42:42Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > I don’t think you understand. Those quotes are about weapons programs, not about weapons. LOL, no offense **Lobo** but you couldnt form a coherent argument at gunpoint. In light of 9/11, a stockpile of WMDs or a WMD dev program had virtually the same amount of threat to the US. (Still waiting for you to say something about the Gore quotes. Or is your shtick is that you ignore stuff you can’t refute?..) > [@](#): > > And it isn’t my job to prove your cites are reputable. You need to provide reputable cites or withdraw them. As I said, even if the quotes are perfectly accurate as stated, they don’t say what you say they did. You suggested that they showed that Democrats said there were WMDs. Actually, it is. I provided a cite. If you think it’s false, you can present another one. You’re the one who said they were (or might be) out of context. Go get 'em cowboy, let’s see some proof. You do this all the time by the way - for example, when it’s a survey that shows your position is incorrect, all of a sudden the survey isn’t good enough for you. I invite you to post _your_ survey, with the better methodology you cry for, and all we hear are crickets. Your wiki attempt is pretty laughable. I’m asking for proof that the Administration deliberately misled America into war, that the books were cooked. You show some innuendo about intel going through non-traditional channels. Sorry, not good enough, and you know it. To prove your allegation, you’re going to have to provide some evidence, a memo or a smoking gun, that outlines that the US knew that there was a) no WMDs, and b) no program to develop them, and c) went to war anyway. Now, were some in the administration looking for a reason to go after Saddam? You bet. Your wiki article states as much, and I have no doubt that they saw what they wanted to see, in analyzing the intel. But motive alone isn’t enough, IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/66 "2010-08-11T03:47:36Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Teach your grandmother to suck eggs. Damn sure was aware of it. I was aware that a hysteria had swept over my beloved country, that madness was abroad in the land. > > ! I don’t know if I’d use the word hysteria, but on this we mostly agree. > [@](#): > > And I was aware that persons of a particular political stripe ruthlessly, relentlessly and cynically exploited that bad craziness for every drop of poisonous political advantage they could squeeze. Completely agree. > [@](#): > > I also remember that GeeDubya swore up and down that it wasn’t a “go to war” resolution, but a resolution supporting his negotiating position, to offer support for an effort to avoid war. I didn’t believe a word of it. How about you? I know the Dems desperately claimed this in the 2004 primaries so they’d look warm n’ fuzzy to the tie-dye/drum circle crowd, but they’d have to be pretty fckn stupid not to know what they were voting for, at the end of the day. > [@](#): > > He also swore up and down that he was not aiming to go to war, that he was seeking a peaceful solution, even as he set in motion the machinery of war as surely as playing Russian Roulette with an automatic. I didn’t believe a word of it. You? He wanted a big stick threat to make Saddam knuckle under to the UN inspectors. Without that vote there wouldn’t be much of a credible threat to enforce compliance. Was he hoping that Saddam would play a game of chicken? Maybe. Some in his administration: probably/definitely. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/67 "2010-08-11T03:49:01Z")
> [@](#): > > Or, imagine if he was bright enough to have stopped 9/11? How would history have judged him then? We’d be laughing. We would still be making jokes about the stupid motherfuckers who cooked up this ridiculous scheme, thinking that it would work. We were attacked by the Keystone Kop terror org. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/68 "2010-08-11T04:27:43Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > …I know the Dems desperately claimed this in the 2004 primaries so they’d look warm n’ fuzzy to the tie-dye/drum circle crowd, but they’d have to be pretty fckn stupid not to know what they were voting for, at the end of the day… Oh, puh-_leeze!_ Been a member of that group for forty years and change, and know full well that nobody gives a rat’s what we think. The only politicians who refer to us do so to scare their victims, hippies gonna git yer daughter, boogity boogity. No body panders to us. The Resolution was invitation from the Republican Party for Democrats with balls and a conscience to commit political suicide and call the President a liar. So yeah, they get a measure of blame. I’m not a Democrat anyway, so you can quit brandishing them at me like waving a crucifix at Dracula. But they didn’t lead, or more to the point, mislead. We Americans elect a man to be the most powerful single human being on Earth. We don’t draft for the position, a man has to be elected, he has to put himself forward and say “I can do this, you can trust me. I will not consign a hundred thousand innocent people to death and then say ‘oopsy!’ I will not mislead you.” Read his speech regarding that resolution. It was a battallion of lies and misinformation, marching in goose-step past your wondering eyes. Lies you probably have forgotten, overshadowed by the towering crock o’ shit that was WMD. Here. > **[President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat](https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html)** > > President Bush Monday provided a comprehensive assessment of the threat Saddam Hussein's regime poses to the security of the United States and the World and our commitment to confront it. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/69 "2010-08-11T05:08:33Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > LOL, no offense **Lobo** but you couldnt form a coherent argument at gunpoint. I’m not offended, because you aren’t a reasonable observer. > [@](#): > > In light of 9/11, a stockpile of WMDs or a WMD dev program had virtually the same amount of threat to the US. (Still waiting for you to say something about the Gore quotes. Or is your shtick is that you ignore stuff you can’t refute?..) I think that’s your song, actually. I’m waiting for you to get me a cite that isn’t suspect. Allow me to reiterate: When posting a cite, it is your job to make sure it has pedigree, it isn’t my job to prove a janky cite that you’ve posted is bad. I addressed the Gore quotes if you want to re-read the thread. They are after 911. Please, try to read and understand the issue before you reflexively attack. Kay? > [@](#): > > Actually, it is. I provided a cite. You provided a blog… or something, I’m not sure what that page is supposed to be. Even if you were to accept that the dayglow page with the animated GIFs as factual quotes, they are not pertinent to the subject. You specifically said they pointed to WMDs in Iraq, but the quotes, as they are typed by the blogger or whatever, aren’t about that. They are about development programs. > [@](#): > > If you think it’s false, you can present another one. You’re the one who said they were (or might be) out of context. Go get 'em cowboy, let’s see some proof. No, this isn’t how it is done. You’re the one offering the internet equivalent of a smeared napkin. As I said, once more because you don’t appear to be catching this: 1. Your cite looks hinky. You are the one offering it, it’s not our job to search for a good cite. 2. The cite doesn’t say things you said it did. So even if the blog or whatever is correct, it isn’t a cite that claims what you are suggesting it claims. > [@](#): > > You do this all the time by the way - for example, when it’s a survey that shows your position is incorrect, all of a sudden the survey isn’t good enough for you. I invite you to post _your_ survey, with the better methodology you cry for, and all we hear are crickets. Your survey was done by mail, with the logo of a specifically conservative company on the envelope and had unprofessional methodology. This is a perfect example of what you’re doing here. Your cite is garbage, but you don’t care, because it says what you want to say. [In the thread you’re referring to the poll was garbage](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=12256000#post12256000), it was done unprofessionally and there is strong pollster bias. This means that it can’t be trusted. It doesn’t mean that I have to find a poll that goes against it, one may not exist. What it means is you haven’t made the case for your assertion. This is logic and reasoning 101. You should know this by now. You don’t care if what you cite is true or not, don’t you understand why that is a bad thing? > [@](#): > > Your wiki attempt is pretty laughable. I’m asking for proof that the Administration deliberately misled America into war, that the books were cooked. You show some innuendo about intel going through non-traditional channels. Sorry, not good enough, and you know it. To prove your allegation, you’re going to have to provide some evidence, a memo or a smoking gun, that outlines that the US knew that there was a) no WMDs, and b) no program to develop them, and c) went to war anyway. I provided evidence. Do you know that proof only exists in math? All I can do is provide evidence. > [@](#): > > Now, were some in the administration looking for a reason to go after Saddam? You bet. Your wiki article states as much, and I have no doubt that they saw what they wanted to see, in analyzing the intel. But motive alone isn’t enough, IMHO. They were doing what you’re doing in this very thread. You are sticking to untrustworthy info that doesn’t really say what you think it says. This is actually pretty funny, you’re a meta-example of the defects in the reasoning of the right. ---
**Author:** ![ricksummon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ricksummon/32/3333_2.png) [@ricksummon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ricksummon)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/70 "2010-08-11T05:37:51Z")
Perhaps George could consult [The Repairer of Reputations](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Repairer_of_Reputations) — but I’m not sure how many Sanity points he’d lose if he did. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/71 "2010-08-11T12:36:33Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > I understand that Bush has a pretty good reputation in Africa. Really? Cite? 'cos he’s pretty reviled where I come from. > [@](#): > > That shouldn’t be easily dismissed. There are people in Africa who still revere Stalinism too. Of course they can be dismissed. For me, Bush’s reputation \*could \*be mended…the day before Hitler and Pol Pot receive posthumous Nobel Peace Prizes, not a moment sooner. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/72 "2010-08-11T12:42:33Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > > [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > > > LOL, no offense **Lobo** but you couldnt form a coherent argument at gunpoint. > > I’m not offended, because you aren’t a reasonable observer. I’m not all that impressed with your reasoningand debating skills either. Undoubtedly that makes me an unreasonable Scotsman. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/73 "2010-08-11T14:09:12Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > And finally, all the quotes from after 911 are dependent on the cherry picked info that the Bush administration gave to congress. Only stressing the very few positive signs and ignoring mountains of negative evidence. > > So, your cite seems to be pretty worthless. Never mind that what matters is the assessment of intelligence officials, not members of congress wanting to make the news. Beyond this, Bush was (at this stage) heavily dependent on Cheney and Wolfowitz for the information that he based his decisions on. The fact that Cheney, Wolfowitz and Feith were able to simultaneously bully, cow and corrupt the critical intelligence infrastructure responsible for serving the President still surprises me to this day. You’d like to think that someone would have stood up and said “enough” to these games, but no one with any power did. It was all CYA all the time. Makes you wonder about those serving in government. The book “Fiasco” has some excellent history on how these decisions were made and the build up to the war. Having said this, Bush seemed very personally intent of punishing Saddam as an “evil” man. I kind of wonder if her would have found a way to go after him regardless of the real intelligence. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/74 "2010-08-11T15:17:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Lobohan](#): > > > > I’m not offended, because you aren’t a reasonable observer. > > I’m not all that impressed with your reasoningand debating skills either. > > Undoubtedly that makes me an unreasonable Scotsman. A scathing review, that would be slightly more weighty if 70% of your posts didn’t boil down to, “_Democrats do it tooooooooooooooooo!_” 😃 I assume the jousting portion of this thread is done and we can get back to what sort of grand gesture the Shrubleyah can make to not be seen as the biggest failure of the new century? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/75 "2010-08-11T15:37:38Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > OK. So your story is that _Bush chose militant Islam_ as his enemy, not the other way around. Got it. :rolleyes: No, faced with a certain narrow segment of militant Islamic terrorists, Bush then chose _pretty much all of Islam_ as his enemy when he decided to start a war against a country that had nothing to do with the attacks. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/76 "2010-08-11T15:38:02Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > > [@elucidator](#): > > > > That isn’t luck, that is the good sense to choose maroons for enemies. > > OK. So your story is that _Bush chose militant Islam_ as his enemy, not the other way around. Got it. :rolleyes: > > Maybe it’s \*\*you \*\* who should listen a bit more, and not just in the echo chambers you’ve apparently been spending your time in? No offense. > > And as for the word choice of ‘adventures’, you’d probably be surprised to know that I’m against both OEF and OIF. I think both are incredibly high-difficulty dives and not worth the cost in both blood and bucks. Of course, now that we’re there, we need to play to win (and/or quickly GTFO). I suppose that puts me somewhere in the Colin Powell/Obama camp. > > The difference between us, is I understand why he thought they had WMD. So did pretty much all of your boys and girls. He (or his advisors) felt that, after 9/11, he had no choice but to take that threat off the table. [http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete\_timeline\_of\_the\_2003\_invasion\_of\_iraq"es\_from\_senior\_us\_officials=wmdQuotesGeneral](http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq"es_from_senior_us_officials=wmdQuotesGeneral) Fact is the Bush admin knew damn well Saddam did not have WMD. This is from the 911 timeline ,something you should read. It is a compilation of news and political info from around the world, in which the Bush war lovers got lots of contrary data about Iraq’s weapons. The inspectors proved over and over that Rummy was a lying little twerp. ---
**Author:** ![Cinebar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Cinebar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cinebar)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/77 "2010-08-11T15:41:18Z")
> [@astro](#): > > Having said this, Bush seemed very personally intent of punishing Saddam as an “evil” man. I kind of wonder if her would have found a way to go after him regardless of the real intelligence. I’ve often thought this, actually even before we invaded Iraq. It always seemed to me that the junior Bush had a particular hard-on for Saddam Hussein and that that probably had something to do with his daddy. I’ve just never been sure if it was because of the alleged “contract” SH had out on his daddy’s life or if he wanted to finish the job that daddy started (capturing or killing SH) but didn’t finish - maybe proving something to the old man in the process. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/78 "2010-08-11T15:59:12Z")
Frankly, I don’t think Bush’s reputation _can_ be repaired. What we should be concentrating on is repairing our own reputation-we elected him, we believed the bullshit(or buckled under it), then we actually _re_elected him. If we allow some spinmeisters to “repair” his reputation, we’ll look even more like insensitive boobs than we already do. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/79 "2010-08-11T17:41:47Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > LOL, no offense **Lobo** but you couldnt form a coherent argument at gunpoint. > [@Lobohan](#): > > I’m not offended, because you aren’t a reasonable observer. > […] > This is actually pretty funny, you’re a meta-example of the defects in the reasoning of the right. Continued personal comments and insults will bring warnings for anyone else in this thread. Insult each other in the Pit if you must, but you can’t do it here. ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835/80 "2010-08-11T22:24:15Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > I understand that Bush has a pretty good reputation in Africa. That shouldn’t be easily dismissed. Perhaps he could build on that by establishing one or more Albert Schweitzer/Mother Theresa-esque hospitals/hospices for AIDS sufferers in Africa. If he seems sincere about it, he could build his reputation up to a Carter-style “He meant well, but just wasn’t up to the job of president” level. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-for-george-w-bush-to-mend-his-reputation/549835.md?page=5)