The worst of all time? I say yes.

I had a thought the other day (and I'm pretty sure I'm right) that the current President Bush will go down as one of the worst presidents in our history, if not the worst. 50, 100, 200 years down the line, I'm pretty sure W will be mentioned in every discussion of our worst, and pretty much accepted by historians as possibly the worst president in the history of the United States. There are a lot of reasons, but obviously mostly because of the War. I mean this thing is bad news. Seems like it was pretty much his idea. He rushed us into it. There didn't really seem to be a strategy, except to announce "Mission: Accomplished." And now, as it drags on, with no improvement, he sees it fit to escalate the dam thing (to use some democratic rhetoric). All the experts and panels and committees and what not that were set up said sending 20,000 more troops over there was a bad idea. And the public was way against it. Up until recently I had known that I disagreed on pretty much every one of his policies, but I sort of just figured that in order to become president, you have to be a smart guy. Sort of just by definition. But now, its like, "man, this guy is an idiot." It's like he's completely oblivious to what's going on around him. Like a girl who is really really stupid, but gets by because she is really good looking. The fact is, even if we sent over 100,000 more troops we wouldn't win. My freshman year I saw this poster that was an illustration of a couple soldiers talking and saying something like "Yea, the War on Terror is great. Remember the War on Drugs and how there's no drugs anymore?" The War in Iraq, which is supposedly part of the War on Terror, really is a lot like the War on Drugs. The worst part is, its not like there's something out there that could be a good solution. I think what a lot of people fail to realize is there is no solution. We can pull out soon, and the "democracy" in Iraq will likely crumble, it will officially go into civil war, and become a haven for terrorists. Or, we can stay for a few more years, then pull out, and the "democracy" in Iraq will likely crumble, it will officially go into civil war, and become a haven for terrorists. It's time to cut our losses. It really is hard not to bring up comparisons to Vietnam. But I guess Bush missed that lesson. Speaking of Vietnam, though, here's what I'm worried about: Nixon took most of the heat for Vietnam. He kept us there too long. But it was really JFK and LBJ who got us started there. Bush got us started in Iraq, but will it be the democrat elected in 2008 who takes most of the heat for it down the line? Either for keeping us there too long or pulling out and watching the "democracy" in Iraq likely crumble, it officially enter a civil war, and become a haven for terrorists. I'm a bit worried it will be the democrat who gets shamed for Iraq. Not that Nixon doesn't deserve heat for Vietnam. He was a Dick (get it?). But on the other hand, I think most historians in the future will realize that this is Bush's war and nobody else's.

Now of course, it is not entirely Bush's fault. He does have an entire administration. But how can you say this guy is a good leader? Everyone says he did such a good job leading us after the 9/11 tragedy (I never thought so - "You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists"? Come on). But look at us now. Right now is where he's led us since the 9/11 tragedy.
And no one ever thinks about the Iraqis. Can you imagine if we actually had a war on our soil? That would suck. Now granted, a lot of Iraqi deaths are the result of Iraqi bombers. But what if when you walked down the street, you always had to worry about the car you are walking by blowing up? But anyway, it's safe to say that the Americans are responsible for about 30,000 civilian Iraqi deaths. That's 9/11 times 10. And that's probably the lowest number you would ever hear. Really its probably about 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead. Now that's a tragedy.

On top of all this, the war has cost 412 billion dollars. By the time it ends it will be well over a half a trillion. What if that money had gone to education, or domestic programs? Now that would make the country better. Instead, we are probably more susceptible to terrorism because of all the terrorist recruits the War has created. What's interesting is that the war is probably underfunded. How many times have we heard about troops not getting their armor and shit? I mean, its probably the case that we simply cannot go to war without spending this much money. This is just what it costs these days. The easy answer to this is to not go to war in the first place.

Beyond the War, it's not much better. There's corruption everywhere you turn. Now this Pat Tillman scandal comes up. Who knows if it's true, but it seems like at least a little shady activity was going on. Not that this was Bush's fault or idea, but ultimately, all this stuff is going on under his administration. Attorney General Gonzalez's unjust firings, catering to corporations and oil companies, Abu Grahib, pre-Iraq War intelligence, Katrina failures, Abramoff, the whole Plame/Wilson/Libby/(Cheney?) thing. The list goes on and on. I hope you're happy, people who voted for Bush. In the future, people will read about the world of 2000-2008, and in reference to Americans of this period, they will say "what the hell were they thinking?"