Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
May 25, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

Pentagon Confirms Airstrike Killed More Than 100 Civilians in Mosul

Czeslaw Milosz: A Life

Truthdig Bazaar
Tiger Bone & Rhino Horn

Tiger Bone & Rhino Horn

Richard Ellis

more items

Ear to the Ground
Email this item Print this item

Bush Being ‘Nixonized’ by Left?

Posted on Dec 2, 2008
Nixon and Bush
Collage: MediaSpin / White House photo: Eric Draper

“Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace braved the “liberal wind,” according to his colleague James P. Pinkerton, by defending George W. Bush from a gaggle of lefties eager to compare Bush to Richard Nixon at a Washington, D.C., screening of Ron Howard’s film “Frost/Nixon.”

James P. Pinkerton in “The Fox Forum”:

But then “FOX News Sunday” host Chris Wallace, braving the liberal wind, asked a question, which was actually more of an accusation. “To compare George W. Bush to Richard Nixon is to trivialize Nixon’s crimes and is a disservice to Bush,” Wallace said. Recalling that 3,000 people were killed on 9/11, and noting that there hadn’t been any attacks on U.S. soil since, Wallace suggested that something had been done right. That’s why, he said, “we are all sitting here tonight so comfortably”—and not afraid of another terrorist attack. Moreover, Wallace said, “Richard Nixon’s crimes were committed solely for his own political gain, whereas George W. Bush was trying to protect the American people.” To suggest otherwise, Wallace insisted, “was a grave misrepresentation of history, then and now.” And, amazingly, Wallace received a smattering of applause.

Read more

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By Inherit The Wind, December 3, 2008 at 7:30 pm Link to this comment

I can’t comment on this thread.

I’m too busy rolling on the floor laughing my @$$ off!

It’s like arguing who’s the smartest bear in the zoo…they are still bears.

Report this

By Patricia Nixon, December 3, 2008 at 1:37 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bush “W” or (as I think of him, George II) makes Hoover, Polk, Buchanan, Pierce et al look like wonderful administrators. Rest assured,they were not. It is even defamatory to compare him to Nixon. NO we reached a new and final nadir, that has placed us into a third world country in a mere 8 years.  I’d say he retires the trophy for worst president ever!

Report this

By mill, December 3, 2008 at 11:41 am Link to this comment

really liked Dr blah blah’s post of Dec 2, 4:29 -
well put

Report this

By Luther Brixton, December 3, 2008 at 6:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There hasn’t beeb any other terrorists attacks? Interesting. I kind of thought the Anthrax attacks were pretty vicious - killing a number of people.

What is the reason that terrorist attack (which Bush ignored and refused to deal with, much like 9.11 and it’s perpetrator) is wiped from history? Do you Republicans even understand that terrorism is a serious issue which should be treated as such and not used as a prop for passing massive tax breaks for the rich?

9.11 - Terrorist attack on Bush’s watch whose perpetrator was never sought or apprehended.

Anthrax attacks - Terrorist attack on Bush’s watch whose perpetrator was never sought or apprehended.

It must be nice to be able to dismiss terrorist attacks committed on Bush’s watch, and grotesquely gloat that they didn’t happen at all.

Report this
G.Anderson's avatar

By G.Anderson, December 2, 2008 at 9:48 pm Link to this comment

Ha, Ha, Ha…

President W. is competing with President Hoover, for the title of most misunderstood president in U.S. history.

This will be President W.‘s most important legacy, that arguments over what he did or didn’t do, will start bar fights, for the next decade or so while American’s face the grim realities of the financial terror he’s left for us. 

This will only end when his defenders, realize that they are only barking into the wind.

Sorry just doesn’t cut it.

Report this

By Louise, December 2, 2008 at 7:32 pm Link to this comment

This is kinda like comparing apples to oranges. They’re both round and grow on trees.

Judging from the most recently released tapes, Nixon not only had a criminal mind, he used it to demand and bully. I particularly like his stated motive for breaking and entering, “... make sure we never have a democrat in the White House again ...” Gives new insight into what makes people like Rove and Gengrich tick. Unfortunately for the repubs, Bush’s criminal mind had to share space with Bush’s empty head, so bad results guaranteed another dem in the White House.

Nixon demonstrated utter contempt for government. And that carried over into the Ford, Reagan and Bush I administrations. After so many years, contempt for government has become an accepted way of life. To the degree that over time, it has become a habit of behavior exhibited in both parties.

When we can get the people to remember the government is ACTUALLY “we the people”, we’ll begin to understand contempt for the government is actually contempt for us! Then we’ll be half way to solving our problems.


“We had a congress in 1974.  We don’t have that today.”

I agree to a degree. But it needs to be noted until John Dean spilled the beans, the repubs wouldn’t go along with impeachment articles. After Dean’s truth-telling, they had no choice. The difference today is no-one, except Bushs former Press Secretary has spoken out. And everybody tried to discredit him ... including folks here! Remember? And of course, we have no tapes.

Nancy Pelosi has worked hard to discredit efforts to bring Bush to accountability.  But I think she thought she knew, she could not overcome the repubs. So her fear of being made to look bad ... made her look bad.  Now had anyone there had the guts to push for an investigation, that investigation might have brought forth testimony forcing repub co-operation. But I doubt it. As noted above the determination to keep dems out of the White House has been and is a burning policy in repub leadership, and the repub party.

And Bush has had criminal minds all around him since day one, so conscious ass-covering has preceded everything he’s done. That’s probably the most tangible connection between the two men. Nixons example of getting caught mapped Bush’s policy of ass-covering.

From the Third Article of Impeachment against Nixon:

“In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.”

But then I suppose if impeachable crimes can be summed up in such a way, evidence or not [and there is plenty of evidence] testimony or not, Bush is clearly impeachable. And the only way Nancy could not see that is she chose not too! Her legacy will no doubt be as empty of greatness as Bush’s.

Report this

By P. T., December 2, 2008 at 6:24 pm Link to this comment

Chris Wallace said, “Richard Nixon’s crimes were committed solely for his own political gain, whereas George W. Bush was trying to protect the American people.”

What nonsense Wallace spouts.  Bush did not launch his imperialist misadventure in oil-rich Iraq to protect the American people.  Actually, it got many Americans and an enormous number of Iraqis killed.

Report this

By Gold Star Father, December 2, 2008 at 5:40 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Although I lost my Marine son in Iraq and I wish to see Bush and quite a few of his cronies go to jail for life, Nixon was far worse for this country. His lies of a “secret plan” to end the war in Vietnam resulted in 4 times the number of US combat deaths during his presidency than have been lost in Iraq. Mendez and troublesum have it right—Congress has shown the utmost incompetence in this era. Bush is indeed a criminal, probably on par with Nixon. Jim Yell has it right-Nixon had an(evil)brain. Bush has Cheney.

Report this

By Dr. blah blah, December 2, 2008 at 5:29 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

After eight years of Reagan, Nixon seemed like a saint.  After eight years of W, he seems like an angel.  If we ever have to endure eight years of President Palin or Jeb Bush he will probably seem like god.

Report this
skulz fontaine's avatar

By skulz fontaine, December 2, 2008 at 5:15 pm Link to this comment

George Bush is no Nixon. Golly, that’d be like comparing Hitler to Tinkerbell.

Report this

By Rob K., December 2, 2008 at 4:57 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To suggest that Bush’s actions made this country safer is a complete fallacy that has been refuted time and again by most military analyst, both Democrat and Republican.

But even beyond that, to imply that Bush’s decision to attack Iraq was a well-intentioned mistake based on the intelligence available to him at the time is entirely false.  There is much evidence that soon after entering office (well before 9/11), the Bush administration was bent on invading Iraq, and the string of “edivence” that Bush managed to piece together after 9/11 to justify invading Iraq was extremely weak and not supported by most intelligence analysts in the CIA at the time.

Moreover, the subsequent unconstitutional power-grab by the executive branch (helped along by well-positioned appointments in the Justice Department), followed by extreme legal violations of the Geneva conventions, domestic wiretapping, and civil liberties at home and abroad, make this the most brazenly corrupt administration this country has ever seen.  That Bush and Cheney are not on trial for war crimes is unbelievable, and Fox News may be their biggest accomplice for justifying their actions to the American public.

Report this

By mendez, December 2, 2008 at 4:35 pm Link to this comment

The folks in power, the millionaire Senators and many millionaire Representatives, remember those names.  They seem to take it for granted the stupid public won’t have the brains or courage to do anything about it. This “Congress” is despised.  I have to believe we are already seeing the upswing in overt anti-Bush chatter.  Thus his mea culpa sorta.  The world will be watching what changes take place in the next few months.  Pirates on the high seas, and Bush apologizing.  Quite a way to end this year.

Report this

By troublesum, December 2, 2008 at 4:26 pm Link to this comment

We had a congress in 1974.  We don’t have that today.
Sam Ervin must have turned over in his grave.  As far as congressional oversight of the war, try to imagine - if you remember these people - Ernest Gruening’s or William Fulbright’s reaction to the administrations Iraq policy.  Younger people who don’t remember anything beyond last week should google these names.

Report this

By mendez, December 2, 2008 at 4:09 pm Link to this comment

The Tenet Deal was anything but incompetent or on behalf of the people.  The fixing of intelligence and the failure for the Congress to subpoena Tenet and force him under oath to explain what happened.  Extraordinary rendition and torture are acts we should allow the international community a voice.  I doubt Bush will be allowed to leave his ranch without a fleet attached.  I doubt the feelings about him will subside quickly.  We will one day have to deal with his legacy the same way the Germans have to deal daily with Hitler’s legacy.

Report this

By TA, December 2, 2008 at 3:57 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I remember the Nixon administration—although not nearly as well as Robert Scheer and some of your other regulars—and think that the only similarity between the two leaders is the extent to which they were reviled in their final days in office. 

If memory serves, Nixon was hated more—people didn’t hesitate to insult him in pick-up conversations on the street, confident as they were that the stranger with whom they spoke shared their view. 

But Bush and his administration are far, far worse and more destructive to the country.  I’d be curious what long-term political experts think, but to me, there’s no comparison.

Report this

By Jim Yell, December 2, 2008 at 3:33 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Nixon had brains.

Report this

By Eric L. Prentis, December 2, 2008 at 3:25 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

President Bush is much worse than President Nixon because Nixon had a clear foreign policy success, i.e., opened up China, and had some honor. Nixon refused to destroy the Oval office tapes that brought him down because it would go against history, also, Nixon resigned the presidency on his own to spare Congress from having to vote him out of office. Bush on the other hand is an incompetent, selfish, lying brat who has no morals, scruples or integrity.

Report this

By mill, December 2, 2008 at 3:17 pm Link to this comment

Even if Mr. Bush’s incompetence was well-intended, his leadership hurt our national interest.

at some point you don’t get an A for effort.  In matters of war and economy, performance matters, not just intent.

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook