Entangled Alliances

In her latest Op-Ed in the New York Times, Maureen Dowd covers Will Ferrell’s “W” on Broadway. The gist of Dowd’s article is the sense of sympathy extended to President Bush, in Will Ferrell’s play, here is an excerpt from Dowd’s article in which she quotes Adam McKay:

“He’s so clearly a neglected 13-year-old that there’s something really kind of heartbreaking about him,” McKay said, calling him “a good-time Charlie” who was “just used his whole life to front questionable business endeavors, and in a way that’s what his presidency was.

“He doesn’t have Cheney’s cartoonish need for power and greed that’s so off the charts you don’t even understand how Cheney got that way. W. may have some awareness, deep down inside, sort of like a petulant teenager who just flunked the trig quiz and knows he screwed up. I think Cheney not only knows but is delighted with everything he did, as is Rumsfeld.”

It’s true that there may be some exoneration of President Bush by the media and public, certainly as Bush’s Presidency ran down the clock there appeared sympathy, from the press.  Why might this be the case and what impact, if any it will have on Bush’s legacy?

Above all,  Bush finally lost, not directly but the Republican brand was committed to two consecutive hammerings in the 2006 mid-terms and crucially in the 2008 Presidential campaign.  The themes of his presidency: the war on terror, free market capitalism, top heavy tax cuts, deregulation were strongly campaigned on by the McCainPalin ticket and their defeat is in no small part Bush’s defeat.

Consider also, the role of Sarah Palin, her dazzling entrance onto the scene was her making and undoing, her speech at the convention lit up the political race only to create a media frenzy that delighted in her demise as the glamour wore off and her deeply embarrassing lack of knowledge crippled any positive role she might have outside of Republican heartland. Take a closer look though and you’ll see the treatment of Palin was little different in themes from the 8 years under Bush, yet by comparison his (deliberate) withdrawn role in the campaigns, while the media delighted on a target was the period when the media and public got over him. He was consigned to history and despite being President, he seemed a passive even powerless force, creating a certain sense of sympathy. McKay highlights as much when he refers to the ‘13 year old’  Bush.

Despite his passive role, Bush did positively contribute to a minor upturn in the media portrayal of him.   He appeared reticent about his Presidency, noting he had some regrets, his final press conference indicated a mixture of bullishness over issues such as his response to Hurricane Katrina, but he also displayed reflective qualities, such as his failure on immigration reform.

Yet perhaps what is portraying Bush in a more positive light is the discord with Cheney’s own departure and here let me be blunt. Cheney’s terrifying hubris, with his ‘no regrets‘, shows a man  who never considered the responsibility he owed, to those he governed. By contrast, Bush’s regrets, underline a humility and appreciation of the responsibility of the President and an acknowledgement that where he failed, harm may have been caused. Dowd’s column, as with Ferrell’s play underlines this dichotomy, showing Cheney involved with a devil in a room full of pentagrams. The reference is clear, Cheney’s evil was the more insidious part of the Bush Presidency and this narrative is drawing fire from Bush himself.

To make the disconnect between Cheney and Bush concrete, and this is the salient point of Dowd’s article, Bush’s failure to pardon ‘Scooter’ Libby, his acknowledgement that justice was done apparently infuriated Cheney, and indications of a growing split between the two is referenced by Tom De Frank, a former White House Aid describing how towards the end Bush stopped running things past Cheney’s office.

From the electoral defeat, Sarah Palin to his humility and dichotomous ending with Cheney has served to give Bush a reprieve, but don’t be fooled into confusing the rhythms of media narratives with the realities of Bush’s historical legacy. The buck stopped with ‘dubya’. From the ‘war on terror’ the proliferation of lies over weapons of mass destruction, two potential quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan, dampening and distortion of Science and perhaps most unforgivable, 8 years which ended in possibly the worst economic crisis since 1929. The last point, the heaviest, because if not the economy,  what did Bush leave America?

All of which, in the eyes of history, will loom unquestionably larger than the a media still not completely over the election, and if sympathy is the best he will get out of his upswing his legacy’s fate looks grim.  Because when all is said and don, the buck stops with the President not the Vice-President and history will judge accordingly.