Triple Plays All Over the Place

As County Fair points out, there is almost no imaginable reason Hugh Hewitt should be included in as any kind of "expert" in a discussion of Bush's legacy, a fact which Hewitt quickly confirms when Politico inexplicably does just that.

Hewitt's first sentence contains three errors.

George W. Bush, like Harry Truman, was president when an unexpected attack inflicted a terrible defeat on the United States. Unlike the far-away launch of the Korean War, the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, savaged the heart of Manhattan and came close to crippling the national government in Washington.

I'm not an expert in the history of the Korean War, but if memory serves, the Korean War came after months of hostilities, a disputed election, and the unification of Korea was the stated aim of the both the North and South Koreans. In other words, the invasion of the South by the North was widely expected. (Wikipedia confirms!)

I also seem to remember that the Korean War was deemed a "tie," in that it was the stated ambition of both sides that the country be unified, but the war resulted in a on-going stalemate, with the country divided along the 38th parallel, much the same as it was before the war. Unless Hewitt is somehow saying that the initial attack by North Korea against South Korea was a terrible defeat for the United States. Either way.

I'm not sure how close the attacks on 9-11 came to "crippling the national government in Washington." I remember that a certain President spent an awful long time flying around in his plane while assuring the nation that Dick Cheney was in control of everything. I remember hearing an anecdote about one GOP staffer getting in his car and not stopping until he reached Harrisburg, PA. I know there was a tremendous amount of fear that day, but I don't recall the crippling of the government or anything like it. Maybe Hewitt is referring to everyone losing their heads and hastily voting to launch an unnecessary war in Iraq, but I doubt it.

And that's just the first sentence. The rest of the article is hackity-hackity. I did like this, though:

Bush’s grand achievement on the domestic side was the most recent turn of a triple play of tax cuts — John F. Kennedy’s, Ronald Reagan’s and his own — all of which prove the incredible economic wisdom of allowing people to keep more of the money they make. It is unfortunately a lesson that is as quickly unlearned as it is productive when relearned. We are watching its unlearning now. Someone down the road will make it four for four.

The long run of economic growth that ended with the subprime crisis was the product of low marginal tax rates. The bubbles that burst did not destroy that truth any more than their explosions undermined the wisdom of free trade, for which Bush was a tireless campaigner.

If the economy is Bush's greatest domestic...Jesus, how do you finish that sentence?