Farewell to Bush, the President and the Man

This article originally appeared in the Washington Times and on Pundits.thehill.com on Monday, January 12th.

OPINION/ANALYSIS:

I have strong disagreements with Mr. Bush on policies and politics; but I have respect and affection for him as a person, going back to our years as friends at Yale College in the 1960s.

My policy differences with Mr. Bush as president are major.

I thought his tax cuts favored the wealthy and were ill-advised. They helped convert a trillion-dollar surplus left behind by Bill Clinton, with some help from a Republican Congress, and converted it into hundreds of billions of dollars of red ink, even without accounting for the Iraq war and this past fall´s economic meltdown.

I strongly disagreed with his decision to go into Iraq preemptively. And I still think, despite progress and some signs of stability and democracy in Iraq for which he deserves credit, that the war was not worth the lives lost or the hundreds of billions spent, with little sign that it had any effect on the war against terror and seems to have had a greater effect of empowering Iran in the region.

I was disappointed by Mr. Bush's apparent indifference to the dangers of global warming and to those in his administration who seemed to care more about ideology and the economic interests of the Republican Party than science and facts.

I worried that, in the name of waging war on terror, Mr. Bush had allowed his Justice Department to approve actions without a sound legal basis, such as torture, renditions, indefinite imprisonment at Guantanamo, warrantless surveillance, and other actions in the name of the war on terrorism that I think have blemished America's reputation around the world as a nation of laws and constitutional principles.

But I also think it is unfair not to give Mr. Bush the benefit of the doubt that he did these things sincerely, believing they were legal under the circumstances and helped protect America from another terrorist attack. And I believe, to be fair, he deserves some credit that no such attack has occurred since Sept. 11, 2001.

And to give credit where credit is due, Mr. Bush also at times exhibited what President John F. Kennedy defined as political courage -- the willingness to stand on principle against the base of your own party. He did so on such issues as comprehensive immigration reform, providing more than 40 million seniors with Medicare-covered prescription-drug benefits, and "No Child Left Behind."

Regarding the latter, despite all the valid criticism that it was too driven by teaching-for-testing and a lack of adequate funding, it should be remembered that the liberal icon and hero Sen. Edward M. Kennedy stood with Mr. Bush at the White House in the early days of his administration to co-sponsor this legislation and still supports this program, because it did produce dramatic improvements in public school performance and accountability in certain respects, particularly among inner-city minorities and poor children.

Finally, lest we forget, Mr. Bush was also willing to touch the third rail of American politics still avoided by most Democrats -- Social Security reform. His proposal that would have allowed individuals to divert a percentage of their contributions to Social Security to investments in the stock market would have added more than $1 trillion to the system's deficit. Obviously, given the market's recent historic plunge, it is just as well the proposal was DOA.

But Mr. Bush is the first president to suggest the rather liberal concept of some form of needs-based consideration in Social Security entitlements. He raised the question of why it made sense for a billionaire to receive a check he does not need whereas the working poor receive a check much less than they need. This was Mr. Bush's "Nixon to China" moment: No Democrat would have dared make such a progressive proposal, even though we secretly were cheering him on.

And now to address Mr. Bush the man.

I have written before about his basic decency and empathy as a person, hearkening back to an incident I recall vividly during Yale days when we were both residents within the small community of Davenport College. We were hanging out one night when a classmate of mine, who was obviously gay, walked by. Someone made a nasty crack. Mr. Bush snapped, "knock it off" or something to that effect -- "why don´t you try walking in his shoes and seeing how it feels."

I remembered this incident more than once as I watched with dismay Mr. Bush allowing his political advisers to use gay marriage as a polarizing political tool to help him win re-election in 2004. But I also knew that Mr. Bush had provided tens of millions of dollars to Africans suffering from AIDS or other diseases.

I know him as a kind man who reaches out to friends in good times and bad, a husband and father who loves his family, and a son whose love and devotion to his mom and dad are profound.

And, finally, I know him as a president who can talk to a particular 10-year-old I know and make him feel important and not patronized. That 10 year-old is my son, Josh.

Josh came home one night from school and asked me whether it was really true that I knew and liked both Mr. Clinton and Mr. Bush, because his friends thought that was impossible. Weren't Mr. Clinton and Mr. Bush presidents from different political parties, he asked? Aren´t you a Democrat like Mr. Clinton? How can you be friends with Mr. Bush, too?

He seemed skeptical that that was possible. I saw it as a challenge from my 10 year-old. So the next day, I sent a note to Mr. Bush, told him about Josh's skepticism, and asked whether I could bring Josh over to meet him.

A few weeks later, Josh was sitting in the Oval office with Mr. Bush. My wife and I were standing away, against the wall, not included in the conversation. We watched with amazement as the president and our 10 year-old engaged in what was apparently a serious conversation for 10 minutes or more.

Then the president reached into his desk drawer and took out a baseball (Josh is a pretty good baseball player, as was Mr. Bush when he was at Yale) and signed it. We overheard the president tell Josh how frightened he had been when he had to throw the first ball out in Yankee Stadium after 9/11, choosing to do so from the pitching mound. He told Josh that he feared -- as Derek Jeter had warned him after a practice session in the player´s tunnel leading to the field -- that he might throw the ball into the dirt and embarrass himself.

Josh laughed, appreciating why that would be embarrassing to a baseball player.

When we were done, young Josh said goodbye with a firm handshake, a smile, and a clear, "Thank you, Mr. President." As we walked out of the West Wing, I asked Josh what he thought about Mr. Bush. "He's cool," was the reply, Josh's ultimate compliment.

Now do you understand, I asked him, why I can disagree with him, vote against him, but still like him? Josh nodded, yes.

Mission accomplished.

Lanny Davis, a Washington lawyer and former special counsel to President Clinton, served as a member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board from 2006 to 2007. He is the author of Scandal: How 'Gotcha' Politics Is Destroying America.

Comments

[Doofus]

Surprisingly enough, it turns out that one Yalie
can't really hold a grudge against a fellow Yalie,
not when a presidentially-signed baseball is part
of the deal anyway. Boola boola!

[SEQUOIABISON]

Mr Davis, I appreciate the fact that you are trying to teach your son to show balance and understanding when dealing with opposing ideals and positions.

But I think it would have been better to speak the truth straight from your heart, that Mr Bush was a president who refused to listen to dissenting opinions and focused on a narrow group of Americans who benefited from his policies, and as a result of his dogmatic foreign misadventures, he left the country and its citizens in the worst possible shape, perhaps in the history of the nation.

You should have told your son that it is difficult to show affection for someone who was so narrow minded and greedy and was responsible for the lose of so many innocent lives.

[magnolialiberal]

As Arendt says, the "banality of evil" is not necessarily characterized by malevolence, but rather by "a failure or absence of the faculties of sound thinking and judgement."

That Bush thought it was possible to invade a country and impose a democracy that would be favorable to the U.S., no matter what the cost to the population of that country, I would count as a good example of this philosophy.

He made not be an evil man, but he has done immeasurable harm.

[ntmessage]

Lanny, You are a true patriot with exceptional insights and points of view so necessary for today"s world. As the man, Bush was in over his head. I am more concerned about policy anyhow and that is why noise around empirical and seasoned judgment like your is actually the enemy of a true democracy. Let us make sure that this president and this country continues to heed your message.

[Titus]

I met George W Bush many years ago when he was the general partner of the Texas Rangers. He was an affable if shallow man who could hold a conversation of no consequence with a complete stranger. I thought even then he was in his position as a result of his family name versus any specific quality or capabilitiy.

Mr. Bush may be a "nice guy" if he's your next door neighbor or the guy on the company softball team. And while he must be credited with the one single thing he did well as President; the aid to Africa to combat AIDS, he must also be chastised and held in contempt for the many assaults on our nation's good character. Least of which is the almost total evisceration of the Constitution.

I'm also exhausted about this "we haven't been attacked since 9/11 nonsense". We most certainly have, and if you were the relatives of any of the people who died from the Anthrax attacks you'd be outraged that this is forgotten. Mr. Bush was asleep at the wheel when we were hit, and we are still quite vulnerable no thanks to him.

I for one will be very happy when he's faded into obscurity.

[mainemomma]

A good lesson for a child. If they don't learn, at an early age, to respect differences yet be respectful to others... they we are hosed.

For some reason, the adult re p u g's and many dem s don't have the basic manners that Josh has. What a shame.

I won't be sad when he leaves office... but this piece was nice to read nonetheless.

[Davwbaird]

So you think the untold deaths of Iraqis as result of his taking this country to war (mankind's most evil action) is some how mitiGATED by something else he did? The buck stops with him. Evil is as evil does.
I have no use for humans who care not for their brothers and sisters as to start a war such as the Iraq war. Even more evil are those who supported him. From my distant perch 3 months before the war, I knew it was totally unnecessary and that no weapons would be found. It was there for all to see. Remember they blamed Iraqi for 9/11 through the 2006 election.

Hate? Revulsion is a better word to describe my response to such evil.

[yesivoteddem]

One more thing, I met Mr Bush at a function at the WH - where the people I was with were easily recognized as all Democrats -

Afterwards, he came over to me and my two friends and he was very friendly and teasing in a very boys locker room sort of way. Teased us about our Chicago Bears. Very friendly.

Nothing big or very deep of course but - surely better than if he hadnt. Friendliness should always be respected.

[flanardiente]

As far as Bush's actions preventing further terrorist attacks on the United States--why would they bother? From their point of view, the attack was a stunning success. We've bankrupted ourselves, brought the military to a straining point and willingly surrrendered many of our basic civil rights. Not to mention the war in Iraq, which has been terrific for recruiting more terrorists, and the war in Afghanistan, which has brought the Taliban back to power. It couldn't have gone better for al Qaeda if Osama had been a White House advisor in the Oval Office.

[yesivoteddem]

Oh Lanny - you are a man of courage!

They are going to come screaming - You dare to say something charitable about GW Bush.

Folks I have met Lanny Davis and he is a very good man and a GREAT Democrat.

If this city was full of men like him who have both spine and kindness - it would be a much better town and a much better Nation.

I respect your words here. We should treat our opponents with exactly the kind of respect we'd hope for in return. But - after this election and the taunting of Palin and McCain - by so many of our fellow Democrats - I dont think that we have reached that goal and ideal as yet.

[ZeMongoose]

I couldn't agree with you more. We need more GREAT Democrats like Lanny, Joe LIeberman and Zell Miller to stand tall as our hero-President saunters gracefully into the sunset. Barack Obama has big shoes to fill. I hope he's up to the task. I hope Vice President Cheney has a role in the new administration. He has so much experience and I'm sure he'd be a great asset in the War against terrorists who are trying to kill us.

[cactusgal]

I couldn't have said it better. Kudos.

[propitiousmoment]

Thanks, I've been coming to the same conclusion lately myself. I still hate most of Bush's policies and actions, but I find it hard to hate the person. Cheney, on the other hand.....

[benjaminblue]

So Mr. Bush was qualified for the office he usurped because he could conduct a 10-minute conversation with a 10-year-old?

And the appropriate words now should be, "So long" and not, "Farewell." Mr. Bush should be told in no uncertain terms that he will be back, to answer for his war crimes, and he should not believe, even for a moment, that anyone wants him to enjoy a moment of faring well, given the misery he has caused virtually every American of current and coming generations, not to mention citizens of the world and lovers of freedom.

Mr. Bush has earned nothing but contempt, despite his ability to talk like a 10-year-old and his talent to stare, blankly, at "The Pet Goat" while America was under attack.