This paragraph jumped out at me from yesterday's press conference:
I'm also looking forward to working with them (the Democrats) to make sure that we institutionalize to the extent possible steps necessary to make sure future Presidents are capable of waging this war. Because Iraq is a part of the war on terror, and it's -- I think back to Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower. Harry Truman began the Cold War, and Eisenhower, obviously, from a different party, continued it.
Seems to me he's still not satisfied with the extent of Presidential power in terms of wiretaps, detentions, and/or interrogation--even after the recent bill regarding habeas corpus and torture.
I also find his saying that Truman began the Cold War and Eisenhower continued it rather curious. Obviously, Truman stood up to the Soviet Union after WWII and also engaged in a rather hot war in Korea to limit Soviet expansion. But "began the Cold War?" I thought the standard language was to assign blame for the Cold War on Soviet aggression.
Bush is likening the ongoing "war on terror" to the Cold War, that it has to be fought and maintained over time regardless of which party holds the White House. It may well be necessary to defend against, and defuse the causes of, Islamic terrorism, but it has become clear that a perpetual hot war--in Iraq or elsewhere--is counterproductive. It should also be obvious that the Cold War went on for years after our defeat in Vietnam, and that victory, to use Bush's term, came only after the Soviet Union collapsed from within.
It's amazing how much is revealed and how much goes wrong in three little disjointed sentences.