Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He only got elected because of Reagan's coat tails and didn't do much while in office for his forgettable one term. He chose a forgettable moron for a vp as well, so I'd say the answer to the question is he will just be remembered for being a one term president and father of a terrible 2 term president. He had a far more exciting and interesting life than most will live, but as presidents go - meh. He did seem to be a very honest and nice guy with very high ethics, a rarity in politics.
I think in 100-150 years, historians will look back on:
- That the Bush I administration sent ambiguous signals through Ambassador April Glaspie to Saddam Hussein leading up to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait ( ‘[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.’ The U.S. State Department had earlier told Saddam that Washington had ‘no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait.’ );
- That Bush I administration built a coalition of countries for Gulf War I;
- The very quick Gulf War I;
- The pardons of six senior Reagan officials charged with crimes from the Iran-Contra arms sales, most importantly Reagan Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger less than two weeks before Weinberger was to go to trail, which was to focus on Weinberger's notes indicating Bush's knowledge of the illegal arms sales;
I doubt that in 100-150 years, much else will be of note, much like we know little about Grant or Hayes or McKinley, aside from the very high or low points of their presidencies. That said, few today know much of anything about the Spanish-American War, aside from the name and perhaps the names, "U.S.S. Maine" and "Teddy Roosevelt's Roughriders."
Maybe it is worth noting that while Ronald Reagan chose Bush, his primary opponent in 1980, to be his running mate, Bush himself did not do the same thing when he was running for President in 1988. Bush did not choose Bob Dole or some other high ranking Republican to unify the party, instead he chose Dan Quayle.
Dan Quayle was chosen precisely to unify the party. Bob Dole was a GHWB clone. The party needed a solid, vocal, pro-life evangelical. GHWB was too reserved in talking about his personal religious beliefs. Quayle was chosen to shore up that wing.
I also think Bush envisioned 8 years as president and that he'd set up the young Quayle to carry on.
Here is an example of how history misremembers (as a famous man once said).
Dan Quayle was given a cue card by the school with the "correct" spelling (p-o-t-a-t-o-e). When the student spelled it right, Quayle looked at the cue card and prompted the kid to add the "e". Should Quayle have known it was the wrong spelling? Maybe, but it is very common misspelled word. Was he set-up? Who knows, it may have been an honest mistake, but the fault wasn't really Quayle's.
That is one of many examples of history getting it wrong. Like how Gerald Ford was portrayed as clumsy. Ford was MVP of the Michigan football team and probably one of the best athletes ever in the White House. His stumbles were caused by the bad knee he got in athletics, not the opposite.
Historians 100 years from now will be different from current historians and scholars. I don't think he will suddenly jump into the top ten, but I think he will be looked on more kindly than some imagine.
He lost not only because of the economy but instead of keeping his promise of no new taxes he signed the bill to raise them. Now the press are praising him, but during his term they hated him, called him a coward and a lot of other negative comments about him.
He isn’t a coward and was a good loving family man who served his country with honor and I believe if he kept his promise about not raising taxes those who were angry with him wouldn’t have voted for Perot.
Yes, and if he'd have kept that promise about "no new taxes," that recession would have been a lot worse.
He will be remembered as a middling president. No major screwups, no major accomplishments. I did not like him as president. I thought he was arrogant, insincere, and out of touch. "read my hips" But though I did not like him, he did his duty to the best of his abilities, and I respect him for that.
Yes, I would agree the wrong diplomatic signals were being sent to Saddam about our reaction to a possible Kuwait invasion. I wonder a little bit about that, was it intentional or just an error? Kuwait is a very small country and perhaps the administration did not realize the significance of such an invasion until after it happened. Or maybe it was a ploy to lure Saddam into a war so we could show off the new hardware?
I think the Ruby Ridge standoff in Aug of '92 may have had a negative effect for Bush in '92. I think he lost some support for that action, and the anti-government sentiment among right wingers became much stronger after Ruby Ridge and re-enforced by Waco. My dad sold Randy Weaver a car back in the 80's, he was originally from Iowa and returned here after his time in Idaho, wish I had bumped into him somewhere and had a visit with him. After Ruby Ridge, that's when the phrase "Jack booted government thug" came into fashion for the ATF, and Bush had to have lost some support from that tragedy on Ruby Ridge, only 2 months before the election.
Yes, poor Dad Quayle, he got cut up pretty bad over the potato thing. Never knew about the answer card being wrong at the school, that was an interesting bit of trivia from The Enchanter. All the late night comedians kept piling it on Quayle after that, they never let up on him.
As an overall MEDIOCRE president who couldn't even maintain or gain the support of many of his own party.
A party that he distanced himself from in his later years. He stood tall in my book (never voted for him) when he renounced his lifetime NRA membership after the gun nuts blew up the Federal Bldg. in Oklahoma City. He had guts.
Decent honorable man but in the final analysis he won't be anywhere near a historians list of the greatest presidents. What has made his passing so conspicuous is the contrast with our current political environment. People are nostalgic about the old days when our politics weren't so heavily polarized, hateful and chaotic.
And he represents a different era and the end of the so called greatest generation. Those people who came back from war bright and hopeful for a new America, the growth of the middle class, a struggle for civil rights and a general optimistic outlook for the future. The new America is growing dark and pessimistic.
He was the last president that really didn't do all that much. Perhaps that was a good thing, but he was definitely the last of a kind.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
