Betsy discusses Bush's place in history. The newspaper she references has four anti-Bush historians waxing elephant. Big surprise. Only problem is that his legacy isn't quite in the past yet. Still one more year to endure, desperate Dems.
One thing I notice, though. Remember all the babbling and bubbling about Clinton's "legacy"? The word was used more than "gravitas". Legacy, legacy, legacy. Blech.
Bush doesn't seem to give a hyenna's hindquarters about his legacy. For all his big-government faults, he is single-minded about freedom's legacy and America's legacy and the West's legacy. Ironically, I think history will look on Bush's legacy with far greater kindness than Bill Clinton's, but that's not saying much.
While I think Buchanan has earned a permanent spot at the bottom, I'd remind these historians how Abraham Lincoln was regarded by many in the country throughout the Civil War. His handling of the war was considered totally inept and he was regarded as a monster who violated civil liberties in order to pursue an ill-considered war. I don't think historians trying to rate presidents in the Spring of 1863, for example, would have exhibited any more wisdom or foresight than these historians today.