by Donald Finley

Created on: April 22, 2008

Former presidents should never speak out against a current president. This has been an unspoken rule throughout the history of our nation, a courtesy observed by those who once walked in the same shoes.

This changed with the current Bush administration. It wouldn't be surprising if a memo surfaced somewhere detailing the Democratic Party's national strategy, "Bash Bush no matter what. Never agree with anything he says. Oppose every policy he tries to enact. Leak negative stories to every major media outlet possible."

This has almost become the national past-time. Even former President Carter, arguably the worst president in history, had to jump on board. Oddly enough, he was well on his way to being one of the nation's best ex-presidents for his work with Habitat for Humanity. But as soon as he opened his mouth, it was to bash Bush. He broke the tradition and hasn't stopped since. He has erased any goodness he had left by becoming active again on the world's political stage. Yes, he won a Nobel Prize, but it was for a lie. The North Koreans didn't honor and never intended to honor the deal he traveled there to broker. Too bad they don't revoke Nobel Prizes.

Now the man is cavorting with terrorists. Does he not understand the way other nations view the presidency? As a former president, he lends legitimacy to Hamas just by saying he will visit and have talks with them. He knows Hamas is a terrorist organization, yet against the stated wishes of the U.S. State Department and the government of Israel, he met with Hamas' leader. He accomplished nothing other than boosting Hamas higher on the world stage, and embarrassing himself and our nation in the process. Perhaps he learned from Bill Clinton. As an ex-president with a horrible record in office, what could he do to boost his legacy?

Bill Clinton hasn't stopped trying to improve his legacy from the time he left office. Along with his wife, the two of them have made endless comparisons of the failed Clinton policies to the successful Bush policies. He jumped on the bandwagon long ago to bash Bush. If Bush policies are successful, and they are the opposite of Clinton policies, then Clinton policies must have been a failure. A simple logical thought would bring anyone to that conclusion, so in line with the hypothetical DNC memo, he could help his wife politically, help Democrats nationally, and make ground in salvaging his legacy. All he had to do was bash Bush. He has been paid a great deal of money for it, as was

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>