UK Realizes That ‘Cowboy Bush’ Far More Effective Than ‘Focus Group Obama’

From the UK Telegraph:

‘Cowboy’ Bush was a far more effective world leader than ‘focus group’ Obama
By Nile Gardiner World Last updated: March 28th, 2011

When he was president, George W. Bush’s international leadership was widely mocked and derided by his liberal critics, who loudly declared that his plain-talking style was undermining America’s image in the world. Even now, the Left cannot resists a dig at the ex-president, with former Obama adviser Rob Shapiro exclaiming to Fox News over the weekend:

The United States is no longer the out-of-control cowboy. Instead, we build global coalitions. We get the support of the Arab world. We get the support of Africa. We get the support of Europe.

Shapiro’s statement ignores the fact that the military alliance built by Bush to confront Saddam Hussein was significantly larger than the coalition on the ground now in Libya, that Europe remains divided over how to deal with Colonel Gaddafi (witness Germany’s abstention at the UN Security Council), or that the Arab League is barely lifting a finger, with one or two exceptions. As for Africa, so far not one member of the African Union has joined the no-fly zone operation. But the Left rarely lets reality get in the way of baseless conjecture.

This theme of Bush as an isolated “cowboy”, acting without the support of the wider international community, was commonplace in the liberal media throughout his presidency. And both John Kerry and Barack Obama ran election campaigns that talked about “restoring” America’s standing abroad. Needless to say, Obama was cheered by hundreds of thousands of adoring Germans when he staged an election rally in Berlin, where he offered what can only be described as “European-style mush” in place of Bush’s hard-nosed and aggressive US approach.

But world leadership of course is not a popularity contest, as Obama himself is now discovering. At the end of the day, a US president must be judged not by his poll rating in Berlin or Jakarta, but by the degree to which he successfully advances US interests, defends his nation, and projects strong leadership on the world stage. And an examination of the foreign policy record of the two presidents shows they are a league apart. President Bush after all liberated nearly 60 million Muslims from tyranny in Afghanistan and Iraq, and launched a global war against Islamist terrorists – no mean feat. As I wrote in a piece for The Daily Telegraph just before Bush left office:

If superpowers do not demonstrate an ability and a willingness to wield power (as Britain did on numerous occasions at the height of the Empire) their hegemony will be increasingly challenged. President Bush exercised U.S. military power to stunning effect in both Iraq and Afghanistan, an important reminder that America was still a force to be reckoned with after the 1990s humiliation of Somalia and the half-hearted missile strikes against Bin Laden in Sudan. In an age of growing threats and challenges, the projection of hard power matters, and America’s next president would be wise to take heed.

In contrast, President Obama’s foreign policy has been marked by a great deal of dithering and obfuscation, from his agonisingly slow decision-making on Afghanistan to the current war in Libya. His biggest “achievement”, the conclusion of the New START Treaty with Moscow, was in reality a humiliating surrender to Russian demands. While President Bush championed the strengthening of alliances with key allies such as Great Britain and Japan, the Obama administration has preferred to downgrade traditional partnerships such as the Special Relationship, and appease America’s enemies and strategic competitors.

President Bush deserves far greater credit for his much maligned foreign policy. Under Bush, the United States was feared by her enemies, respected by her allies, and decisive in the face of a series of crises. His successor however seems all too often paralysed when it comes to US leadership, and unable to act without a permission slip from the United Nations or the Arab League. Liberals should just admit it – George W. Bush led the world rather than followed it. In contrast, the professorial President Obama runs US foreign policy like a focus group, unable to act without the stamp of approval of other international actors, and projecting weakness in its wake.

One writer notes that Obama’s Libya “kinetic action” speech is even bombing in liberal DUmmieland.

8 Responses to “UK Realizes That ‘Cowboy Bush’ Far More Effective Than ‘Focus Group Obama’”

  1. margarita Says:

    At least he knew what he was doing as far as steps being taken to address issues we were involved in. He had a plan!!!!!

  2. Michael Eden Says:

    Bush was anything but perfect. No human being is and CERTAINLY no politician is.

    But Bush had a worldview that actually allowed him to see and understand the world, because his was the Judeo-Christian world view – the “God’s-eye” view. Versus Obama, who has his Marxist theories which have an impressive 100% record of crushing the human spirit every single time it has ever been tried.

  3. Says:

    I read an interview they did with him in a AARP magazine and it was his honesty and his determination to stick to his beliefs, even at work, that was most refreshing to read about him. He was very honest about his mistakes while in office, and the things that kept him up at night. I just don’t remember seeing any other president in this humble and honest light before. No one is perfect or will ever be, however, that said, it’s their attitude that goes far, and his attitude was humble, honest and meek. I just love him. I actually love him more now than ever. I’m sure that if he ever wanted to run again, we would put him right back in office. A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD BE CHEWING ON THEIR SHOES!!

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    Bush’s biggest mistake as president may well stem from his personal humility. He didn’t stand up to the media or to the Democrats and fight through the lies.

    People kept hearing one lie after another, and Bush was the only guy who had the power of the microphone to correct the sea of lies. But he didn’t do it (maybe thinking, “It’s not about me,” I don’t know).

    The sad result was that people bought the lies.

    The best example was the financial meltdown of 2008. That had Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac written all over it, and Democrats OWNED Fannie and Freddie. Further, Republicans like George Bush and John McCain REPEATEDLY tried to regulate Fannie and Freddie, but Democrats blocked every manuever.

    But when the whole thing collapsed, Bush didn’t stand up and shout to the Democrats, “When you point a finger at me, there’s THREE fingers pointing back at YOU!”

    And he should have done that.

    I think Bush was just plain worn out by that point.

    But I agree with you, Margarite. George Bush is a good man. And a truly decent man. And a Christian brother.

  5. margarita Says:

    What on earth mistake did I make to post my email? *laughing at myself*

  6. Michael Eden Says:


    Hopefully I fixed your email exposure by putting it in the correct blank. I would only want you to have happiness and joy when you open your email.

    I STILL don’t know why you went from being automatically approved to post instant comments to having to be approved. Every time I click “approve” for one of your comments (which has been every single comment you’ve made), it should be automatic.

  7. margarita Says:

    Isn’t that strange??? I don’t even curse! I have a vocabulary where I don’t need to resort to that! Funny! And no, I haven’t received any hate mail! LOL. Thanks for the effort made to correct this. I love leaving comments on your posts.

  8. Michael Eden Says:


    There are people who leave comments that make me groan the moment I see their names/avatars. These are the liberals who don’t know up from down, and need to be corrected anew.

    You, I like to receive comments from.

    There have only been two people who have ended up in spam by accident. There’s you and a great fellow who goes by the name Dauntless (after the renowned WWII US dive bomber). It’s intermittant; sometimes your comment shows up where it should, and sometimes its in the spam file. Hopefully it doesn’t have anything to do with the fact that you’re both conservatives and Christians, but I wouldn’t put that past ’em.

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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: