I think Bush will eventually be seen as a deeply flawed, not terribly intelligent, well-intentioned but intensely ideologic, failure.

I hope the Russian guy is wrong.

I think that in the future when the media influence and constant barrage of insults isn't as prevalent we will see the actualities of this administration and presidency. AKA, when people jump off the bandwagon.

I think he will be remembered as a President who did what he thought was right, and didn't turn to the opinion polls to determine what to do next a la Bill Clinton.

is this supposed to be a trick question?

oh boy how will i remember bush, oh boy.

I think he will be remembered as a president who had the best intentions going into Iraq, that he didn’t care as UnDave said about the polls or what the media was saying about him. I think his flaws, such as not talking to the American public as much as he should have during bad times , will be summed up as a bad decision for sure. The evil dictator label that he has on him now, will fade away once people get some perspective in their lives and learn to have an open mind about what they consider the “opposite” of their carved in stone views. I really hope that the label of "idiot" and "frat boy" doesnt stick, because they never made sense.

"The evil dictator label that he has on him now, will fade away once people get some perspective in their lives and learn to have an open mind about what they consider the “opposite” of their carved in stone views."
Because only people who support Bush - at least as a military leader, not necessarily his economic actions - have perspective and open minds?

It's interesting that people who recently insisted that McCain was nothing like him still think someday Bush will be remembered with respect.

I think Bush will be remembered for all the good legislation he helped push through like the bailout packages and the medicare prescription drug plan.

I think with the liberal strangehold on academics and the media there is no possible way for Bush to be remembered for a second outside of party lines.

Those who like him now still will and those who don't still won't. The truth is somewhere in the middle. But people love a scapegoat, and thats what he has become for absolutely everything that ever went wrong in anyone's life between 2000 and 2008. No soy in your latte? Bush's fault.

strangehold = stranglehold

"Because only people who support Bush - at least as a military leader, not necessarily his economic actions - have perspective and open minds?"

I think its because the amount of pure hatred and vitriol spewed at this man has no comparison on the right. There is truly no where in history where the right has treated anyone on the left with this much hate. I mean, really, it is something that I think will be studied and there will be books on.

Geesh, I'll even be willing to admit that MAYBE there was an instance when people on the right were filled with somewhat close to this amount of rage but because we don't own the media or the blogosphere there is no way to compare the two.

If at least half the country has been conservative for much of the past 30 years, and Washington has been dominated by conservatives for most of the past 30 years, and the media is controlled by major corporations that benefit most from conservative leadership, how did those wiley liberals get this stranglehold on the media and academics? Is this stranglehold measureable, or provable or is it something that certain people know when they see it?
Because I'm guessing that just as some people think Bush is unfairly scapegoated for everything that went wrong in peoples' lives, some people also think that anyone who disagrees with them in any way is liberal.

No Stephley what i said was, in a nutshell, that one day the people who hate him might look at him with an open mind. But I wouldnt expect anything less from you to see it differently.

Because oh yes I only think us Bush worshipers have perspective on the universe and an open mind.......

Perspective- a measured or objective assessment of a situation, giving all aspects their comparative importance, solely pertaining to republicans and Or Bush Lovers.

I said Bush Lover, Yesindeedy

"It's interesting that people who recently insisted that McCain was nothing like him still think someday Bush will be remembered with respect"

I only ever insisted that McCain be seen as his own person not as "he voted 90% with Bush" thats all.

CG, I didn't say you specifically, but I would say you were more emphatic than that. And more than one person here has tried disassociating both Bush and McCain from 'true republicans.'

You might consider that some people who don't like Bush today initially did come to him with an open mind: and that it was his behavior that turned them away. Many people saw him as benign at worst when he was first 'elected'.

'The downfall of America.'

Will be remembered as a baffoon.

I will always remember George W. Bush flying amongst the unicorns in my dreams.

I also think he will be remembered as the President who had a whole bunch of bad sh!t thrown his way during his Presidency.

I think many people are influenced by the media's perspective of him and nothing more. Stephly, you are a rarity, you know your stuff. You have valid reasons and concerns for why you don't like the man. Most others who hate Bush, at least 90% of the ones I know, can't even give reasons why. They are like, oh he's an idiot, oh he's a cokehead, oh he single handedly got us into the war. It's all his fault. Oh and on another thread, the gas prices are high because Bush made them that way cause he gets more money. They are highly unintelligent arguments, and These people who were so easily swayed by the media, probably will with time forget what was fed to them. They will see him for the programs he created, all of the rural health clinics that he facilitated opening and the medicare rx plan. I even think that the war stigma will go away with time, because so many people fail to remember that democrats got us into most of our wars.

Historically, the Democrats have been America's war party. Bob Dole got into trouble during his 1976 vice presidential campaign when he denounced World War I and World War II, along with Vietnam and Korea, as "Democrat Wars," but most of America's foreign wars began with Democrats in the White House: add the Mexican War, the Cold War and the War of 1812 to the Democrats' count. Republicans, even including the Federalist and Whig predecessors to the GOP, could only claim the Spanish American War and the Gulf War before the War on Terror and George W. Bush.
1st barbary war - Jefferson- democrat
war of 1812 - madison - democrat
mexican american war- polk democrat
ww1- woodrow wilson - democrat
ww2- roosevelt - democrat
bay of pigs - kennedy- democrat
vietnam war - johnson democrat

"I think its because the amount of pure hatred and vitriol spewed at this man has no comparison on the right. There is truly no where in history where the right has treated anyone on the left with this much hate."

Are you kidding?????

Didn't you just live through the election season? I saw PLENTY of the right spewing hate at Obama and Hillary.

"we don't own the media or the blogosphere there is no way to compare the two."

Umm, just read Michelle Malkin for a few weeks and you will feel plenty of the right's hate! Or Redstate. Or watch Fox. Or tune into Conservative Sugar where they erroneously rage about "Lefties" taking away your 401k.

an idiot for a president

Wow Jill! Thanks for proving my point!

There is no possible way a rational person with any kind of perspective could possibly think that any politcal person has been the subject of as much hate as Bush. I mean its just not realistic.

You mentioned Red State and Malkin, really? Thats like our two biggest people and I'd be willing to bet whats left of my 401k that their daily visitors are probably less than 30% of the daily vistors to JUST the HuffPo. Not even mentioning MoveON or the Kos. Not exactly apples to apples.

So sorry but there really is no comparison whatsoever when it comes to hate. You liberals have owned it for the last 8 years. Sure the Pubs hate, but not nearly on a scale like the liberals have when it comes to Bush. To act as if the two are even close to each other is a stretch to say the least.

As for Conservative Sugar, I'm sure the 15 vocal people there even out the HUNDREDS of hateful liberals around the sugar network

Just because the liberal sites are more popular doesn't mean that they "own" the blogosphere, or that conservatives don't have and use the right to make their views known. You are trying to make a case for victimhood that does not exist. All Republicans are just as empowered as Liberals to make their voices heard on the internet.

And sorry, the liberals don't "own" hate. There is plenty of it on all sides, but the Republicans really made a case for themselves when they repeatedly called for violence against Presidential candidates this year.

Nice use of "you liberals" by the way...in my head I imagine that I am getting the Bill Clinton finger wag with it...They need to make an emoticon for the finger wag!

McCarthy, LBJ and Nixon were seriously hated. Ted Kennedy and his family have been the targets of serious hate campaigns for decades. Every move the Clintons make has been criticized for years, and conservatives regularly insist that while Bush isn't responsible for anything bad that has happened during his terms, Clinton was responsible for everything during his and much of Bush's.

Red State isn't a person and I think Drudge, Limbaugh, Coulter and Buchanan would argue over your assessment of its and Malkin's importance - Drudge's numbers top HuffPo still.

If conservatives can't stand up to a handful of mouthy liberals, whose fault is that? Go back and look at entries last spring, before Obama moved ahead. You guys were on top of the world and had no problem saying anything you pleased to anyone.

I forgot Hannity and O'Reilly!

I never once said that people on the right don't hate so I don't even know why thats being discussed.

The fact is that the left has "owned" hatred in recent years because they've militant and nonstop about it. And since 70% of the media is left biased as was shown in numerous studies, it continues. I use the term "own" as in have the majority of.

And Druge is not conservative, a nonpartisan group found that while its deemed conservative the entirety of the content is middle left.

And never once did I say we couldn't stand up... Geesh are you even reading the comments? I'm not even trying to make it be a victim thing. Its a REALITY thing. Liberals run the media. It has been PROVEN. They are more effective when it comes to blogging. This is reality! Even if pubs hated on a person as much as the libs hated on Bush, no one would know! We don't have a platform from which to spew our hate.

It doesn't really matter anyways, once the LIbs get the "fairness doctrine" or what I like to call the thought police passed, what little voice conservatives have will be washed away entirely. And then you'll win and you'll get the nanny state and the thought police. Thats what its about right? Tolerance for everyone but conservatives.

Woohoo! CHANGE!!

"I also think he will be remembered as the President who had a whole bunch of bad sh!t thrown his way during his Presidency."

And he handled the sh!t the wrong way... by not really handling it. 'It will all correct itself'.

He may have had the best intention with Iraq, I'll give him that but he's destroyed things at home, like the economy, by giving the war more money and attention.

Bush will be remembered as Cheney's and Rumsfield puppet.

Oh jeez - now Drudge isn't conservative??? What 'nonpartisan' group decided that, and who decided they actually were nonpartisan?
So: Bush and McCain = not real republicans. Any one who criticizes the President = not a real American. Drudge = no longer conservative.

I'm reading the comments, but the revisions are making it hard to keep up.

@hausfrau: you're GOP platform is called Fox.

lmao I just caught the Druge isn't conservative. That's the funniest things I've ever heard.

On what planet isn't Druge conservative?

The return of the Fairness Doctrine is a conservative myth. No one's discussing it in our secret liberal meetings.

"Even if pubs hated on a person as much as the libs hated on Bush, no one would know! We don't have a platform from which to spew our hate."

I am really confused by this statement. They have access to write-read-create-share anything on the web. They have the most powerful cable news channel, and own the Wall Street Journal. They have numerous platforms. The "pubs" aren't victims.

Get your pitchforks and torches!

Run Haus!

If you say something inflammatory, you should expect some heat.

The left "owns" hate. Thanks Haus, I needed a laugh.

In case there is a conservative out there who wants to see examples of these platforms, here is a list of the "Best Conservative Blogs on the Internet". It has over 100 sites to vent away with.

www.urbanconservative.com/2007/02/13/best-conservative-blogs-on-the-inte...

If you prefer a traditional magazine, you could always pick up National Review or the Weekly Standard too (among many others, of course).

"Bush will be remembered as Cheney's and Rumsfield puppet."

This I kind of agree with. I feel that he handled very important things poorly...but ultimately, the REALLY bad things were done by his administration. The Valerie Plame leak, playing politics with the Justice Department, false case for war, FEMA and Katrina etc., weren't done so much by him as his people...but at the end of the day it is people he appointed (including "heckofajob Brownie").

Either he was so weak that he could not control his staff, or he was the catalyst that encouraged all of this mind blowingly unConstitutional behavior. Neither option is flattering.

If the left "owns hate" can some one please explain to me the emotion that the right has displayed to the Clintons over the past 16 years? What would you call that? Disdain? Intense loathing? Abhorrence? Revulsion? Disgust?

No side can claim to be completely innocent in disliking players from the other side. Heck, the right has found ways to blame Clinton for almost all of Bush's mistakes. Think they will let the blame for Obama's fall on Bush? Not likely.

"If the left "owns hate" can some one please explain to me the emotion that the right has displayed to the Clintons over the past 16 years? What would you call that? Disdain? Intense loathing? Abhorrence? Revulsion? Disgust?"

Well, Clinton *was* totally responsible for 9/11. Get your facts straight, kas.

How do liberals own hate? How does anyone own it? I try my hardest to be open minded and see things from all sides, and I don't think anyone's innocent here in the 'saying bad things about other parties' contest. Hmmm...

...and when I say 'anyone here' I mean in general, as in Dems vs Repubs, etc.

"Well, Clinton *was* totally responsible for 9/11. Get your facts straight, kas."

I wouldn't say he was "totally" responsible, but he had an opportunity fo do something about it, and didn't act. To me, therein lies his blame.

I think Haus is talking about the main stream media.... Red State and Malkin I wouldn't consider main stream media. I am talking about the websites and television that people are normally supposed to trust as non-partisan. Your local newspapers... such as la times, sf times, fresno bee etc.... all liberal. I can name many more. Of the major broadcast news station... cnn msnbc fox news abc cbs. How many are lib/conserve? And fox news, while they do have some commentators that are very conservative, the actual reporting of the news is so center it's incomparable. The fact that everyone on here rants about it that much, tell me they never watch it. Except for the excerpts on sites like huff po or on comedy central.
They are constantly getting a bad rap on the internet. Drives me crazy, anywho---- I wouldn't say Haus was playing a victim at all. I think if anyone is a victim the media is making the entire us population victims because they are trusting what they hear in the media and the media is pushing their agenda. They shouldn't do that to the American people. The people can make up their own mind regarding a candidate without media broadcasters(not commentators) talking about how they get a tingle up their leg when they hear about Obama.

It is pretty arrogant to assume that anybody who thinks Fox News is a conservative leaning station is just catching clips on the internet or daily show. The reporting of the news and the people delivering it are not center. I watch Fox news for a little bit every day (on my television, not the internet and not on the Daily show, but on Fox hews channel itself) and it is indeed a right leaning station. Just like MSNBC is a left leaning station.

"Your local newspapers... such as la times, sf times, fresno bee etc.... all liberal."

You realize you only listed examples from California, and that most people who live in the other 49 states would not consider these publications "local".

There are plenty of publications that are moderate...the past 8 years has had plenty of bad news for the right, though. I think that even an unbiased source should be able to point out the misteps of the administration, but apparently that is equated to "bias" by some.

Apparently, if you're not neo-con, you're liberal - another unilateral redefinition by the right.

Considering the healthy listenership (is that a word? No. F it) of right-wing talk radio programs, the generally healthy ratings of Fox commentators' shows, the existence of Rupert Murdoch, and the availability and ease of online publishing tools available to any average Joe with something to say, I think it's high time for this "liberals own the media" thing to be put to rest.

Jude - The only argument I would make against that is that those are cable or XM radio shows, and not everyone gets those. Liberals own the Mass media outlets, like the big 3 TV stations, and many newspapers (especially the mega dailies). I do agree that the cable shows are gaining in reach, and will soon equal any one of the big 3.