Bush's New Book Has us Talking Legacy, History's Judgement and more

Ok, plain and simple from my opinion. Do I think that history will be kinder to the legacy of our 43rd President, George W. Bush? Yes. Let's face it, as I've always held, a lot of what he did that was hotly controversial at the time and even still now, will be documented from a purely factual standpoint in history books, softening the emotional blow so to speak. Oh and time heals all wounds just came to mind.

From what I see from the snippets of his interviews so far on his new book, it seems to be exactly what "the doctor ordered." Candidly admitting mistakes, regrettable actions based on what was later determined to be bad info, all the hallmarks of a sincere leader after a rough period of leadership. I waxed and waned during the Bush era, I really did. Like a sometimes manic and moody first Republican and then an Independent I loved him, I hated him, and it changed by the minute some days!

But I NEVER doubted the man's patriotism and sincere desire to protect his country. He even said, when Matt Lauer asked him about the practice of waterboarding, "Because the lawyer said it was legal, he said it did not fall within the anti-torture act. I'm not a lawyer. But you gotta trust the judgment of people around you, and I do." I know all the Liberals and Bush haters just had a conniption, screaming, "Bull!" and let's not forget the morally wrong nature of torturing people even if it didn't fit some legal definition of torture, right? Well in my opinion, that's all fine and good, but there were some dark days there folks when we didn't have the luxury of all this.

Sure we can second guess it all now, but like the man said he had a critical job to do, was surrounded by people who said he was acting legally and he went at it. I'm hearing a good strong "gray zone" argument here, aren't you???!! Bottom line, time and the selective memory of history may indeed soften the blow to Bush's legacy, but we shall see, right?