History will view this as a consequential presidency. George W. Bush was one who thought boldly and aimed explicitly to make a lasting impact. And there's been major changes in public policy regarding the war on terrorism, of course, and U.S. foreign policy and homeland security — but also domestically on taxes, on education policy, on health care. Full Story »
Posted by Walter Cox
I'm glad this article wasn't just another Bush-bashing. There is plenty of that to read elsewhere. But I think NPR in apparently trying to be "balanced" is doing so at the expense of objectivity. This is apparently the first in a series, so hopefully this author will display more naked, objective analysis in subsequent articles. However, in starting with a faulty premise (that Americans are undecided about Bush), it seems he would have to betray the series title to do so.
I think the title belies the faulty premise: Americans really aren't very divided about Bush's legacy. Except for hard-core republicans, the only real debate for most Americans is whether Bush was a bad president or an awful president. Personally, I can't remember a worse president (and I'm a conservative Democrat).