George H.W. Bush, a graceful gentleman, disliked the dirty work of politics

[Anonymous]

He was my kind of president. Cautious, pragmatic and a consensus builder.



By Ed Rodgers



There is a lot about President George H.W. Bush that we will miss. And the current occupant of the White House puts into vivid relief the things that we will miss the most. Our president today couldn't be more different from Bush. I hope the values that Bush brought to his distinguished career in public service won't be lost. The qualities that defined Bush are timeless, and I think they will again reemerge in American politics. As a leader and as a human being, Bush will be a role model for a long, long time. But in many ways, he was the last of an era.



If there is such thing as a divine hand guiding us, then it is likely that God made Bush to be our president during such a critical time in American history. He was the transitional leader who skillfully led the United States into the post-cold World era, and it was he who passed the baton to a new, post-world War II generation of presidents.



As a staff person in the Reagan White House, Bush's 1988 presidential campaign and the Bush 41 White House, I also saw Bush cope with changes in American politics. Specifically, he came to power at the dawn of the "permanent campaign." In today's politics, the campaigning never ends. There is no hiatus for governing once elected.



Bush thought politics - or at least campaign politics - was a seasonal business, and that it was dirty. Dirty in the sense that it was unbecoming. Being a gentleman and turning the other cheek were sometimes impossible. Campaigns can require going negative, highlighting your opponent's mistakes and flaws, and sometimes distorting your opponent's positions or statements. Bush didn't like any of it, and he wasn't particularly good at it — so he resisted being in "campaign mode," as he called it. But he was a realist, he was competitive and he wanted to win.



In 1988, I served as Lee Atwater's deputy when he was then-vice President Bush's campaign manager. Bush knew he needed people like Atwater and Roger Ailes, but he thought they belonged on a shelf, only to be deployed as needed a few months before an election. He tried to keep them on a short leash. A lot of energy was expended during the 1988 campaign trying to sell Bush on the advertisements and other initiatives that would target his opponents and rile voters with pointed messages. To say the least, Bush was a gentleman and an adult. He did not like the gritty aspects of campaigns, and he did not like hardball campaign tactics that, at times, became mean-spirited and personal. I don't think Bush ever reconciled his desire for a kinder, gentler nation with the style of the 1988 campaign that elected him.



Much will be written this week about Bush's personal grace and dignity, and it should not go unnoticed that perhaps his last act of personal generosity is directed at the incumbent president. Bush would consider it unthinkable that a sitting president would be excluded from paying respects to a former president. But it says a lot about Bush that he would make certain that the sitting president would be included at his funeral even though he does not meet Bush standards as an appropriate steward of the presidency.



The President Bush whom I was privileged to observe would have no greater hope than perhaps that the gathering for his funeral would somehow make a contribution toward strengthening the presidency, and that his memory would remind us not only what qualities are important but exactly which character traits make the best presidents.

[Wazzzup]

He was in the middle of my best/worst list (excludes Kennedy and Nixon)



8. Barack Obama (worst)

7. Lyndon Johnson

6. George W Bush

5. Jimmy Carter

4. George Bush Sr.

3. Bill clinton (bad man but not bad policies and achievement)

2. Ronald Reagan

1. Donald trump (so far)



Not bad, but nothing remarkable either.  Generally a decent man, but not committed to rolling back progtardism (although at the time that wasn't nearly as important)  



While many in the media are praising him (much of it so they can use his grave as a prop to bash Trump) they hated him at the time, not as much as they now hate Trump, but they did hate him.



Best move--Appointing Clarence Thomas to the supreme court

Worst move--caving on his no new taxes "read my lips" promise.

[Bricktop]

One of those in your list is a war criminal.

[Gaon]

One of those in your list is a war criminal.

Which one do you consider a war criminal? Lyndon Johnson?

[Bricktop]

No.



George W Bush.



Why did his father invade Iraq? Because it invaded Kuwait without reason or cause.



Yet George W Bush invades Iraq without reason or cause.



It was a war crime.



Johnson "inherited" Vietnam from Kennedy, about whom people seem to ignore that he put the US into another unjustifiable war.

[Gaon]

No.



George W Bush.



Why did his father invade Iraq? Because it invaded Kuwait without reason or cause.



Yet George W Bush invades Iraq without reason or cause.



It was a war crime.



Johnson "inherited" Vietnam from Kennedy, about whom people seem to ignore that he put the US into another unjustifiable war.

The primary rationalization for the Iraq War was articulated by a joint resolution of the U.S. Congress known as the Iraq Resolution.



The U.S. stated that the intent was to remove "a regime that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, that harbored and supported terrorists, committed outrageous human rights abuses, and defied the just demands of the United Nations and the world." For the invasion of Iraq the rationale was "the United States relied on the authority of UN Security Council Resolutions 678 and 687 to use all necessary means to compel Iraq to comply with its international obligations".



That doesn't sound illegal to me.

[@realAzhyaAryola]

I admired George H.W. Bush. I am so impressed that he insisted that the current President attend his funeral. I am glad for this.

[@realAzhyaAryola]

George H.W. Bush sparred often with Dan Rather.

[Wazzzup]

I admired George H.W. Bush. I am so impressed that he insisted that the current President attend his funeral. I am glad for this.

So much better than McCain who used his own funeral as a prop to bash Trump.  Utterly despicable.

[@realAzhyaAryola]

McCain had a temper but it seems George, Sr. did not have that. If you recall, he wanted a "kinder, gentler nation."

[@realAzhyaAryola]

A third George Bush could be running in the future to reside in the White House. That would be Jeb's son.

[Anonymous]

An third George Bush could be running in the future to reside in the White House. That would be Jeb's son.

I Googled him Azhya..



He has an impressive c.v.

[Bricktop]

No.



George W Bush.



Why did his father invade Iraq? Because it invaded Kuwait without reason or cause.



Yet George W Bush invades Iraq without reason or cause.



It was a war crime.



Johnson "inherited" Vietnam from Kennedy, about whom people seem to ignore that he put the US into another unjustifiable war.

The primary rationalization for the Iraq War was articulated by a joint resolution of the U.S. Congress known as the Iraq Resolution.



The U.S. stated that the intent was to remove "a regime that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, that harbored and supported terrorists, committed outrageous human rights abuses, and defied the just demands of the United Nations and the world." For the invasion of Iraq the rationale was "the United States relied on the authority of UN Security Council Resolutions 678 and 687 to use all necessary means to compel Iraq to comply with its international obligations".



That doesn't sound illegal to me.

One of your neighbours comes to tell you that another neighbour is planning to burn down your house.



You go to that accused's house, beat the snot out of him, and burn HIS house down.



However, it is then learned that your informant is lying. Further, you simply took the word of the informant without verifying or corroborating, nor applying due diligence. There was no real evidence of any impending attack on your house, merely the lie of the informant.



Now, do you think you would avoid a gaol penalty by claiming your actions were "legal"?



BTW, the UN is NOT a statutory authority and cannot determine what is legal and what is not. I remind you that Israel has been in breach of UN declarations for decades, as it does not regard those declarations is legally binding. Nor does any other country.



If you wish to rely on the old "removing a dictator" excuse as a basis for legality, I assume you will approve of the US invading Syria, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, China and every other nation ruled by "dictatorship".



It astonishes me that intelligent and knowledgeable people still think that Bush wanted to throw out a dictatorship. Bush wanted to show the world America's military power in a practical and emphatic way, and Iraq was his target of choice, because there was at least a flimsy vestige of justification. Importantly, Iraq would be a military pushover, with a population of 20 million, a ragtag army equipped with outdated weaponry and supported by an air force just barely better than biplanes. Iraq also had lots of oil, with which it could repay America's magnanimity once a "democratic" government was formed.



It was also an excellent opportunity to field test its modern weaponry on the battlefield (just as Russia is doing in Syria).



Bush is a war criminal, and he knows it. That is why he has not, to this day, ever left the continental USA since leaving office, for fear of being arrested and charged in the Hague.

[Gaon]

Bush is a war criminal, and he knows it. That is why he has not, to this day, ever left the continental USA since leaving office, for fear of being arrested and charged in the Hague.

To be a criminal, one has to break the law. He fulfilled domestic requirements and international protocols. Congress passed the Iraq War Resolution. Iraq refused to comply with UNSCOM which lead to Resolution 1441

Interpol, the international police organization, does not list any outstanding arrest warrants for Bush or Cheney in their searchable database. Meanwhile, experts in international law said they were not aware of pending warrants, particularly from the most obvious entity that might issue one -- the International Criminal Court in the Hague.



The ICC "has not issued warrants for any American citizen, let alone for Bush, Cheney, or anyone else," said Anthony Clark Arend, Georgetown University professor of government and foreign service.

Bush visited Haiti as part of an effort by the charitable foundation he co-founded with former President Bill Clinton after a devastating earthquake in the Caribbean nation. And Bush also joined Clinton at a regional economic summit held in the Canadian province of British Columbia. Cheney, meanwhile, has gone to British Columbia to promote his book, In My Time: A Personal and Political Memoir.



Bush and Cheney don't travel abroad much because of protests not warrants.



And so we are clear, I did not support the Iraq invasion and regime change. It destabilized the region even more than it already was. But, invading Iraq was carried out legally.

[Bricktop]

By that criteria, would you please explain what a "legal" war is?