You know how evolutionists insist that given enough time, anything can happen? Well, they're still wrong about biology, because irreducible complexity and the Second Law of Thermodynamics (entropy) do not allow it. But American politics? That might be the exception:
Taunted by Republicans to declare war on Islamic terrorism, Democrats are turning to an unlikely ally: President George W. Bush.
Barack Obama, under pressure to be more aggressive on terrorism, regularly cites his predecessor's refusal to demonize Muslims or play into the notion of a clash between Islam and the West. It's a striking endorsement from a president whose political rise was predicated on opposition to the Iraq war and Bush's hawkish approach in the Middle East.
As Hillary Clinton put it, "George W. Bush was right." [emphasis added]
As Sheldon said to Penny and Bernadette, "Keep it up, I've got no place else to be".
Laying out her plan to [surrender to Islamic] terrorism, [Mrs.] Clinton reminded voters in Minneapolis earlier this month of Bush's visit to a Muslim center six days after the September 11th attacks. She even quoted his words from that day about those who intimidate Muslim-Americans: "They represent the worst of humankind, and they should be ashamed of that kind of behavior."
Bush, of course, was not referring to the 2016 Republican presidential field. [Mrs.] Clinton certainly was.
Actually, I think Dubya was referring to Islamic Fundamentalists. Or at least, he should have been. That the old puffgut thinks Republicans are "the worst of humankind" is, of course, no surprise at all.
What does this mean? That on this question, Bush43 was....wrong. Which isn't at all shocking, as GDub was wrong on quite a few things - education policy, fiscal continence, immigration policy, and, yes, his refusal to recognize that 9/11 signaled the full-fledged return of the Clash of Civilizations between the (figuratively) Christian West and Global Islam. A conflict that has been raging for a millennium and a half and was only interrupted by the rapid technological advances and industrial development of the past couple of centuries (fueled by the freedom, liberty, and capitalism that are the products of Christian values) that enabled the West to rapidly gain political and military superiority over the Muslim World. With the end of the Cold War (i.e. World War III) came the accelerating cultural and political decay of the U.S. and Europe at the same time as al Qaeda's rise and Pakistan's and Iran's nuclearization.
Those were the circumstances in which Dubya came to the presidency, King Josiah-like, and the mission history and destiny handed him. And he handled that mission in half-assed fashion. On the one hand, he did promptly take out the Taliban and tear down the stupid-ass "wall of separation" between the CIA and FBI for intelligence-sharing purposes and restore internal security capabilities via the Patriot Act, and he began the process of liberating the Middle East from the control of Islamic Fundamentalist and jihad-sponsoring regimes, most especially those with WMD capabilities and nuclear ambitions. And Iraq was the logical next regime-change choice, as Saddam Hussein's regime met both of the latter two criteria, and even a cursory glance at a Middle East map is enough to figure out that Iraq is the perfect staging area for cleaning out that region of its bloodthirsty, warmongering Islamic Fundie infestation and their state-sponsor enablers.
But Dubya didn't finish the job. Syria could have been overrun in ten days in the summer of 2003, before any "insurgency" could have had the chance to stoke up, Lebanon neutralized, perhaps in concert with Israel, leaving Iran surrounded on three sides by the genuine U.S.-led coalition that could have, at the very least, ultimatumed the mullahs and dictated terms to them on their de-nuclearization, or preferably, freeing Iran of Shiite jihadist control once and for all. And make no mistake, that's what the mullahs were fearing; Muammar Khaddafy voluntarily gave up Libya's WMDs for precisely the same reason. It's difficult to believe the mullahs would have been any different, what with the "Crusaders" at their very gates.
But then part of Dubya's failure to finish the job was the deranged hatred the American Left, filth like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, had for him after the 2000 failed Al Gore bloodless coup attempt, which was only exacerbated to murderous proportions by the heights of popularity to which he rose after is muscular response to 9/11. Years of constant, relentless, daily "anti-war" agitating and hatemongering that Bush43 never engaged and countered and defended himself from or counterattacked against turned the country against this war that desperately needed to be fought while the opportunity and capability and advantage existed. And so it wasn't fought to its necessary end, as though FDR had been forced to cancel D-Day and leave the Nazis in control of Europe. And then Dubya was chased from office, the voters installed an Islamocommunist in his place, and the rest is jihadist-delighting history.
George W. Bush started a, well, "crusade" that he was not allowed to finish, and perhaps wasn't capable of finishing because he, too, didn't understand, or wasn't willing to accept, the true nature of our enemies and the scope of the conflict they are waging against us, and have been since the seventh century.
And, having destroyed him politically and undone all the progress he did accomplish in this regard, the American Left now uses him as a propaganda prop against those of their domestic "enemies" who are coming to a greater realization of the true Muslim threat.
Not the legacy I imagine GDub expected.
Man, Cornwallis had no idea, did he?