Debate over Bush legacy not so simple

One of the central debates over the legacy of President Bush is whether his prediction that history will vindicate him will come true.

If it does, two things likely will have transpired: Mr. Bush’s status as protector of the country will have won out above other narratives, and policies such as his aid to Africa will have been given prominent status in his remembrance.

Mr. Bush came into office expecting to be a domestic-policy president. The Texan wanted to rebrand the Republican Party as one of “compassionate conservatism.”

One of Mr. Bush’s lasting legacies did turn out to be a mission of mercy, but that drama played out on another continent - Africa - rather than in the U.S.

However, any discussion of Mr. Bush’s successes must include his response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

“That day defined my presidency,” he said during a Dec. 17 speech at the U.S. Army War College.

Besides his national security achievements, Mr. Bush will point in years hence to his tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, his appointment of conservative judges, his commitment to free trade, the enactment of his No Child Left Behind initiative and the expansion of prescription drug benefits for seniors.

Despite these domestic-policy achievements, Mr. Bush will be remembered as a wartime president. It is here where defenders of the administration have been engaged in making their central case on his behalf, which is that he prevented a repeat of Sept. 11.

Detractors, however, dispute the extent to which the Bush administration should receive credit for the absence of another attack, saying any number of factors could have prevented that.

Additionally, nearly every national security decision made by Mr. Bush in his post-Sept. 11 years has sparked controversy, from the invasion of Iraq to warrantless domestic surveillance to the U.S. military’s detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

In his Dec. 17 speech, Mr. Bush threw down the gauntlet for those who questioned his methods and decisions.

“While there’s room for honest and healthy debate about the decisions I’ve made - and there’s plenty of debate - there can be no debate about the results in keeping America safe,” he said.

‘The dog that didn’t bark’

The argument that Mr. Bush prevented another Sept. 11-style attack is difficult to rebut, especially in the political arena.

Democrats have by and large avoided frontal assaults against the claim, but neither have they conceded the point. On this year’s anniversary of the attacks, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked whether the California Democrat thinks Mr. Bush is responsible for the absence of another attack.

Story Continues →