Chris Hayes nails it. Again:
In her column this week, Miss [Jennifer] Rubin compared George Bush's record as president to that of Barack Obama: "Unlike Obama's tenure, there was no successful attack on the homeland after 9/11."
Right, if you don't count the biggest terrorist attack ever in the history of terrorist attacks on American soil which took place on George W. Bush's watch, then, well, then there were still the anthrax attacks of 2001 which remain unsolved to this day.
But maybe those also fall under this mysterious First Year Immunity Rule that Bush apologists wold really like us all to operate under when it comes to evaluating George Bush's record on terrorism.
And when it comes to the economy, they would please like you to forget that George W. Bush was still at the wheel in the back half of 2008 for that whole Worst Financial Crisis in 80 Years thingy.
Jennifer Rubin, for one, counting Bush's 7 1/2 years of job growth and prosperity? 7 1/2 years, you think to yourself, that's not quite how long he was in office. She is not lying about his presidency, she is just carefully editing out the bad parts.
But there is a third technique being employed by those seeking to resurrect George W. Bush's image this week, and this particular defense by George W. Bush's own former staffers and loyalists might just be its most damning indictment of his presidency yet. It's the argument... not that he made the right decisions, but that he made decisions, and that is what made him a good president.
There is no reason to overthink the Bush presidency, people. It was just as bad as you thought.