Is Bush Irrelevant? Hmm, Let’s See…

Old school conservative Pat Buchanan concludes that, yes, Bush is irrelevant. He had to ask?

A man with a 28% approval rating, defecting inner circle, foreign policy failures at every turn, and an economic apocalypse unfolding in slow motion? He is only relevant in that we must hope that he won’t do any more damage. From Buchanan:

“When loyalists defect and seek to profit from that defection, it is usually a sign of a failing presidency. And, indeed, events suggest that history is passing Bush by.”

“America remains the first economic and military power on earth. But after seven years of Bush, we no longer inspire the awe or hopes we once did. We are no longer the world hegemonic power of the neocons’ depiction.”

“Of Bush, it may be said he was a far better politician and candidate than his father, but as a statesman and world leader, he could not carry the old man’s loafers.”

Kind of makes you miss the days when Buckley and Buchanan rode tall in the saddle.


One Response to Is Bush Irrelevant? Hmm, Let’s See…

  1. homesickamerican says:

    yeah, and pat is oh-so-relevant himself. puh-leeeze!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: