Any story must keep the reader intrested from headline and opening paragraph to the last sentence. If it does not do that, the reader loses interest and goes elsewhere. Nice pacing and good visualization help keep the reader intrested in this piece that originally appeared in the New York Times. I'm not certain I would consider this an outside-the-beltway story. It is something of a puff-piece, but is quite readable if a little lacking in balance.

Fluffy and light like a local story of a high school graduation. Perhaps it could be re-titled "A Ship of Fools."

Adequate for a PR piece or a yearbook narrative, but not "quality journalism" because it endorses the warm fuzzy interpretation of the Bush years, and facilitates the spread of a highly myopic view of a reckless and destructive presidency.

The story delivered on the title. It was also notable that the editor didn't muck it up with a sensational adjectives like most of the major media sources have opted. It's always refreshing to see American news written by non-Americans for non-American markets. in this case the reader got glimpse of the reality that exists inside the Bush team, whereby they do actions that are clearly a defensive strategy (as it relates to the legacy) however their rhetoric spills with confidence about their accomplishments. No child left behind has many more victims than celebrants yet - the four words seem to evoke a cheer. It appears that this article, without being snarky, managed to demonstrate its points without turning it into a stink bomb.

It reports the facts of the Presidential project nicely and for outside perspective it takes a very well respected academic, Dallek, who creates a context that shows the unusual truth of this campaign.