The 5 Sins of George W. Bush (and no, Iraq is not one of them)

On the last day of the Bush presidency we look back on the last 8 years. Pres. Bush delivered one of the best speeches of his presidency Thursday night reflecting back on the last 8 years and on his vision for America.

Only the most irrational Bush haters would deny the signal accomplishments of the two terms: No terror attacks on U.S. soil since 9-11, five years of unprecedented job growth, and the corner turned, with no going back, on raising the standards we set for public school education.

Having said that, we look back and wonder what might have happened and how much better things might have been, but for the shortcomings of the Administration. I think the Bush Administration faltered in five areas. Four of them were mistakes of governance; the fifth a policy blunder that has severely diminished this Presidency. Here they are:

1. Attitude. My experience in working with a couple of the executive agencies of this Administration was that they had little desire to hear opposing points of view or to be receptive to suggestions. Certainly no one expected Mr. Bush's appointees to forego their conservative principles which earned him his two electoral victories.

But at some point you cross the line from principled to stubborn and then to insular. I have seen that line crossed several times. The result: A reputation, rightly or wrongly to "go it alone." What this did in many cases (Iraq being one) was force supporters to choose sides. Too often they chose to change sides.

2. Failure to communicate. To quote Strother Martin's character in Cool Hand Luke, what we had here with the Bush Administration was a failure to communicate. Republicans with few exceptions (Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich) are terrible communicators.

Republicans in 1994 captured both houses of Congress for the first time since before the Depression by taking their message directly to the people. Reagan and Gingrich took it to the house--your house. They hit the road and took their message directly to the people--bypassing the Democrat-dominated political class in DC as well as the biased, leftist media poohbahs. They effected change like tax cuts and welfare reform by going directly to the people and getting them to whip their elected representatives into line.

On the other hand, Pres. Bush, time and time again, remained sequestered in the White House or on his ranch, blowing chances to defuse Democrat attacks by taking his case directly to the people. In his farewell address Jan. 15 he was forthright, articulate and almost combative about his accomplishments. One can only wonder what the last 8 years would have held had he done more of that.

3. Loyal to a fault. Loyalty is a quality all Americans admire. And the President was nothing if not loyal to his advisers. Unfortunately he tended to stay with them even when it was apparent to most Americans that they weren't up to the challenge.

The Bush Administration was defined by three events: 9-11, the economy, and Hurricane Katrina. We all remember Mr. Bush's attaboy to failed FEMA administrator Michael Brown. "We're proud of you, Brownie," he told a skeptical TV audience, as the feckless Brown tried to lead the federal response to Hurricane Katrina. Despite Brown's designer wardrobe, Americans saw little to be proud about in the government's disaster response under his leadership. That disconnect between the President's propping up of an obviously over matched administrator and the television images of an unparalleled disaster more than anything spelled the end of Mr. Bush's popularity.

The President was also ill-served by long-time friend Don Rumsfeld. Sec. Rumsfeld stubbornly clung to a concept of a light, fast attack in Iraq, about which he seemed to have an incomplete grasp, with little afterthought on how to hold the ground once the attack was successful. Even on his way out the door, he continued to resist the addition of 30,000 troops into Iraq to stabilize the situation.

Then there were the three Treasury secretaries--O'Neill, Snow and Paulson. They failed to connect the dots of below market interest rates, rising commodities prices, and an over leveraged mortgage market. Had the President been less loyal to advisers obviously over matched in the three signal events of his Presidency, the governments response to all three might have been more successful.

4 .Failure to say no. It was not near the end of his first term that the President vetoed a bill sent to him by Congress. By contrast, his father scotched Congressional bills 44 times (including several pocket vetoes) in just four years. President George W. Bush leaves office having vetoed just 12 times.

The veto was designed by the Founders as a tool to maintain the equilibrium between the Executive and Legislative branches. But Pres. Bush's failure to use it led to an emboldened Democrat-controlled Congress gaining the upper hand. Democrats, unconcionably putting politics above the nation's interests, refused to cooperate on issues like free trade and the President's judicial nominations. This has hamstrung the federal courts for several years and will probably be responsible for a swing to the left in Columbia. There is no doubt who has been in control of the ship of state over the last two years. It hasn't been the decisive guy who stood atop a pile of rubble at the World Trade Center in 2001 and challenged Islamic terrorists.

5. Destabilizing the U.S. currency. "Sound as a dollar" used to mean that something was stable, durable, and a benchmark for its class. Now "Buddy, can you spare a dollar" seems more appropriate. For most of the last decade the Federal Reserve, led by Alan Greenspan and his acolyte Ben Bernanke have been responsible for the devaluation of the dollar.

The Fed chairmen have pursued a monetary policy of lower and lower interest rates. There were good reasons and results for this originally. It held recession at bay. It made American goods cheaper abroad, creating jobs and offsetting the loss of jobs that moved offshore over the last 10 years. It made home ownership affordable for more people--even if people who shouldn't have qualified for home loans under any circumstances got to play.

But the continued policy led to an overheated economy. Because it weakened the dollar, it suddently took more dollars to buy the same products as before. Americans woke up to find $4.00 gasoline and $5.00 heating oil. It created the housing bubble that burst last year. It has led to two so-called "stimulus plans" that have guaranteed the U.S. will remain a debtor nation for several generations.

Certainly the President does not control or directly influence the Fed. But the President took credit for the results of the Fed's interest rate policy. Increased exports. Increased home ownership. Job creation. All good things.

But on the rise in commodities prices like oil? Not so much. He blamed that on Democrats stymieing plans for more domestic drilling. The mortgage debacle? He challenged Democrats for a lack of control on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but like the coyote in the Roadrunner cartoons, failed to recognize the ticking time bomb that was an over-leveraged mortgage market . On the trade deficit? The best he could do was challenge Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a real profile in courage, to bring Mr. Bush's Columbia Free Trade Pact to a floor vote.

History is written by the victors, wrote Churchill. How President Bush will be remembered by history depends on who emerges the winner in the global war on terror, and who can entice this economic genie back into the bottle.

I'll remember the President as that guy with the bullhorn--a plucky little leader who didn't sign up for one crisis after another, but who didn't shirk from confronting them, either. A flinty-eyed Texan who conquered his own demons and exhorted the world to conquer theirs. A good and decent man who delivered us to his successor--a little bruised but none worse for the wear. Thank you, Mr. President.

Just thought you might like to know.