Pennsylvania TownHall -- Where the Voice of Pennsylvania is Heard!

Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College

Mission Accomplished

by Paul Kengor,
President, Shenango Institute for Public Policy

Editor's Note: A longer version of this
article first appeared in American Thinker.

It was a little over five years ago, on May 1, 2003, that President George W. Bush was set to speak aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln. It was assumed the president would arrive on the aircraft carrier in the usual way—via helicopter. Instead, he entered via an SB-3B Viking, which the president flew with two other pilots. The plane skidded to a screeching halt on the small runway, a few feet from the ship's edge. A beaming Bush emerged in bomber jacket, tucked his helmet under his arm, and posed for pictures with the military. He gave an excellent speech under a banner marked "Mission Accomplished."

Initially, Bush's landing received rave reviews. MSNBC's Keith Olbermann called it "a great moment." Chris Matthews characterized the landing as a dare by Bush to Democrats hoping to challenge his bid for two terms: "Try to do this. Look at me. Do you really think you've got a guy … who can match what I did today? Imagine Joe Lieberman in this costume."

Matthews colorfully went on: "Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger…. Women like having a guy who's president. Check it out. Women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It's simple. We're not like the Brits. We don't want an indoor prime minister type…. We want a guy as president."

Yet, something else was stirring. In the New York Times, the angry Frank Rich dismissed the landing as Hollywood hype: "The Bush presidency," growled Rich, "might well be the Jerry Bruckheimer presidency," referring to the producer of Hollywood features like "Top Gun," "Black Hawk Down," and "Armageddon."

Of course, it is hard to take Rich seriously on anything, including references to movies—his specialty. Rich, after all, observed the scourging of Jesus in The Passion of the Christ and thought about gay porn. (Don't believe me? Click here.) Nonetheless, The New York Times has a Scripture-like influence on liberals, and this salvo by Rich was the start of something: For the first time since the invasion, the hard left descended on Bush, especially those who embarrassingly predicted a bloodbath and didn't get one. They would excoriate the landing, and would not cease and desist for the next five years.

From the Senate, Robert Byrd (D-WV), who had harshly criticized Bush war policy, called the Lincoln landing a "spectacle" and an "affront." Over at the House, Henry Waxman (D-CA) practically lost his mind, demanding a Congressional investigation of the landing.

Liberals were lunging, grasping for something to criticize. They would stubbornly wait for something bad, and got just what the doctor ordered once the body bags began piling up in the occupation/reconstruction that followed. They would mercilessly pound the "Mission Accomplished" episode as a brazenly premature celebration.

In point of fact, Bush had been correct in that the mission had been accomplished. The military effort to remove Saddam Hussein and liberate Iraq was wildly successful. That was Phase 1, a separate mission altogether different from the much more treacherous, difficult period when the United States sought to stabilize Iraq and establish a rare oasis of sustainable democracy in the explosive Middle East.

But here's what everyone seemed to miss: a crucial marker was indeed laid on the deck of the Lincoln that day. In retrospect, the landing provided a profound example of the ultimately most destructive liability of the two-term Bush presidency: the utter failure of the president and his administration to engage not Al-Qaeda but domestic detractors.

Rather than counter the likes of Senator Byrd, even with humorous one-liners to defuse the situation—"Senator Byrd is just jealous that he doesn't look that good in a fly-suit"—this president and his team curled up in a fetal position. As they did, George W. Bush was kicked unceasingly, by Byrd, then Howard Dean—"George W. Bush is not my neighbor!"—then MoveOn.org, then John Kerry, then Ted Kennedy, then George Soros, then the New York Times, then David Gregory, then Dana Milbank, and on and on.

A very devout man, this was perhaps Bush's way of turning the other cheek. But he offered more than his cheek. He handed over his backside as well, and an enraged left unleashed itself. While I admire Bush's virtuosity, he should know that nowhere in Scripture are Christians called upon to be doormats.

Yet, that's what the Lincoln landing seems to have signaled: President Bush became a whipping boy who took the beating without ever punching back. It was as if he crashed on that deck. The landing signaled the start of a presidential no-response team, ceding the battle to the president's ravenous critics, who were permitted to frame public perception on the war. Even now, well into a period when the nasty occupation/reconstruction has turned the corner, George W. Bush's approval ratings continue to nosedive.

And it is quite ironic that the fifth anniversary of the Lincoln landing arrived at the exact time that CNN-Gallup released its poll revealing that Bush had surpassed Harry Truman's record-low disapproval rating.

In the end, a mission was accomplished five years ago: the left learned it would be able to pummel this president to his long-term detriment. And now, with the 2008 election only months away, the entire Republican Party seems stuck on the landing deck.

Paul Kengor is author of God and George W. Bush (HarperCollins, 2004). He is also professor of political science and executive director of the Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. His recent books include The Judge: William P. Clark, Ronald Reagan's Top Hand (Ignatius Press, 2007) and The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism (HarperPerennial, 2007).

Paul Kengor is president of the Shenango Institute for Public Policy. He is also associate professor of political science at Grove City College and a visiting fellow with the Hoover Institution. His forthcoming book is God & Ronald Reagan (HarperCollins).