Yawn...I guess if Clinton hadn't passed all of those bank de-regulation laws during his term, the economy wouldn't be in the shape it is today. Of course, it likely wouldn't have grown as much as it did, and it is very likely that it wouldn't have reached the levels that exist today, even after the recession.

Furthermore, your statement that the war in Iraq would continue to falter and become a greater quagmire are just flat out wrong. By all accounts (among those who actually deal in facts), the surge in Iraq has been a success and the chances of a stable Iraq are much greater now than in 2004. I am a firm believer that history will consider Iraq a major feather in Bush's cap, but that for time to decide. What we know now, however, is your statement is flatout wrong.

Bush has had the misfortune (or good fortune for our country) to preside over uniquely challenging times. Thankfully, a man with convinction was in office to make hard decisions. Presidents like Gore and Kerry would have pandered their way through 8 years and left this nation much worse off (as much as the nattering nabobs of negativism would like you to believe, the United States is not on the verge of destruction).

Political parties are always subject to tumulutous times and 8 years of one president always seems to take its toll on the party in the power. The Democrats will now face the same reality.

For spooky prescience, nothing can top this Onion piece from '01:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28784

Satire that turned true, frighteningly enough. Satirists, writers and cartoonists and other artists are often the first to see the course we're heading, even if they themselves think (or hope) they're just being humorous.

Btw, I think you mean "Back in September of 2004"... to start this piece.

1 I agree with your William, but I have given up trying to reason with the true believers. Really, once I read things like "Count Rove, Price of Darkness" I recognize that we have crossed out of rational discourse and into the realm of theology, and a rather cultic version at that, so I just back slowly away.

There is a lot of annoying messianic babble right now, and plenty of remembered and retroactively re-imagined prophecies. But fear not. To paraphrase from a sacred text that I am more comfortable with: this too shall pass.

OK, re: Iraq. I suppose if you measure success by the number of dead arabs, then yes, Iraq has been a rousing success. Do you really think Iraq is on the brink of a developing into a functional democracy?? If you do, what flavor was that kool-aid?? Grape or Cherry??

The surge has been a success. Ok, what sort of success?? Has it brought a measure of peace to Iraq?? Probably, but an actual f***ing plan for a post-invasion Iraq could have done the same thing years earlier. Has the surge enabled us to bring home our troops?? No.

Bush's challenges have largely been of his own making. Invading a country in response to 9/11 that had nothing to do with 9/11. Increasing the government debt through wars and corporate aid to drug companies that contributed to our current financial mess.

I only hope you live long enough to have history confirm what most of us know---Bush was a crap-sandwich president.

Oh, and I agree with Chris, and respectfully disagree with William. I'm sorry but while it's certainly true that not everything can be laid at Bush's feet, and some of the economic disaster we're now facing can also be blamed a bit on Clinton and congress (and it also goes back farther than that, I could write a whole treatise on how Reagan's trickle-down policies doomed our future, but that's another story) -- but Bush had so much to do with the mess we're now in it's unbelievable to even fathom how one could think otherwise. No, 9/11 itself wasn't his fault but his disastrous response to it was; squandering all the goodwill the USA had been garnered after that tragedy, instead of fighting a focused battle on Bin Laden, targeted in Afghanistan, we went and created an entirely new quagmire in Iraq that had nothing to do with 9/11, as noted above me. He took a record budget surplus and turned it into the worst budget deficit in history, which our children's and grandchildren's generations will be paying off. Do I have to even get into the constitutional lines that were crossed? The wiretapping? The lying? The complete and utter tragic disaster that was the aftermath of Katrina? The real estate crash? Consumer confidence at an all time low? I mean, who's fault is that, Jimmy Carter's? If Clinton could be impeached for making a stupid marital indiscretion and then lying to us about it, then (to paraphrase Patton Oswalt, and toned down a bit), shouldn't Bush be in jail by now?

How about the recklessness with which he's treated environmental laws? The big shrug of the shoulders with which he greeted global warming? The opening up of our precious natural resources for energy/oil companies to wreck instead of having a legitimate plan for the future? Oh, and our education system is in utter crisis, state by state, city by city (and I know this from firsthand experience) and Bush's administration had NO ideas to contribute to this other than continuing the nonsense that is standardized testing.

History will make him out to be an even worse president than I think people even realize right now. And I for one can't wait til I can start watching the news again without cringing with worry about what malapropisms will come from mouth of the leader of our great nation. Sorry, we agree that this is a great country and we hope for the best, but I guess we part after that.

Yes, 2004 should be the year. I have corrected it. Oh and I do agree that the Clinton administration deserves some levels of the blame, but during Republican control, none of the lending changed by Freddie Mac and Mae. They were all in the pockets of lobbyists, with the Republicans trying to deregulate everything and have as little of oversight as possible. Of course, we the voters elected these people and many of us chased the housing bubble like drunks at a hot Craps table. There is plenty of blame to go around, but Bush was in power when it all blew up and he did nothing to stop it during his first 6 years. (See no vetos)

Yes, 2004 should be the year. I have corrected it. Oh and I do agree that the Clinton administration deserves some levels of the blame, but during Republican control, none of the lending changed by Freddie Mac and Mae. They were all in the pockets of lobbyists, with the Republicans trying to deregulate everything and have as little of oversight as possible. Of course, we the voters elected these people and many of us chased the housing bubble like drunks at a hot Craps table. There is plenty of blame to go around, but Bush was in power when it all blew up and he did nothing to stop it during his first 6 years. (See no vetos)

Rove was masterful at what he did. I mean think of the achievement of electing twice a dimwit like dubya, though a major assist must go to Gore and Kerry. I will call out Obama if he runs his White House like Bush did, using hot-button, bullshit issues to keep his base in check, just like Rove instructed him to do.