The other day, former Wyoming congresswoman and member of the January 6th Committee Liz Cheney called on former President George W. Bush to endorse Kamala Harris for president. Cheney and her father Dick Cheney (who served as Bush’s vice president) have endorsed Harris and joined the choir of never Trumpers who claim that Trump is a threat to democracy. Bush 43, some may recall, was a strong proponent of NATO enlargement. Up to now, Bush 43 has been publicly silent, though his daughter Barbara has endorsed and is actively campaigning for Harris. “I can’t explain why George W. Bush hasn’t spoken out,” Liz Cheney said, “but I think its time, and I wish that he would.” But while a George W. Bush endorsement of Harris would make headlines, it is doubtful that it would help her win the election. (READ MORE from Francis P. Sempa: The Garbage Election) Bush: A Good Man and Flawed Leader By all accounts, Bush 43 is a good man, and his leadership during the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks will always be something to admire. Of course, those attacks happened on his watch and he can no more escape responsibility for preventing them than Franklin Roosevelt can escape responsibility for failing to prevent the Pearl Harbor attack or John F. Kennedy the Bay of Pigs debacle. As Harry Truman said, the buck stops at the president’s desk. And Bush eventually sullied his response to the 9/11 attacks by launching an ill-fated war in Iraq and an even more ill-fated global crusade for democracy that had this country and its soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines fighting in endless peripheral wars that distracted us from the real geopolitical threat that was emerging in the Indo-Pacific. Moreover, many of those supporting Harris are the same crowd that used to chant “Bush lied and people died” about the Iraq War. There are even some never Trumpers who claim that Bush’s lies about the Iraq War created a “blueprint” for Donald Trump’s presidency. In fact, Donald Trump has said “Bush lied, people died.” Donald Trump has for eight years been consistent in his criticism of the “endless wars” prosecuted by the Bush 43 administration. A major theme of his “America First” approach to foreign policy is to avoid wars of choice that are at most peripheral to U.S. national security interests while deterring great power threats like China’s. Trump sees the Ukraine-Russia war as one of those peripheral conflicts that is draining our resources even as China becomes ever more threatening in the western Pacific. What is more, Trump seems to understand that the war hawks promoting escalation in Ukraine are simultaneously pushing Russia closer to China and risking the outbreak of a global war between nuclear powers. Bush 43 supports the Ukraine war and America’s support for a Ukrainian victory. Like Biden, Harris, and others Bush has invoked the specter of Munich to justify U.S. support for Ukraine. He has called Ukrainian President Zelenskyy the “Churchill of the 21st Century.” He also thinks we should still be in Afghanistan. (READ MORE: 46 Years Ago, the Soviet Empire’s End Was Set in Motion) Bush 43, some may recall, was a strong proponent of NATO enlargement. During his presidency, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Slovakia, and Romania joined the alliance. In 2008, he spoke publicly about having Ukraine and Georgia join the alliance, despite warnings from Russia experts that such a move would infuriate the Russians and possibly lead to conflict. So at the same time that Bush 43 was fighting wars to attempt to transform Middle Eastern countries into democracies, he was pledging on behalf of the American people to wage war — including if necessary nuclear war — to defend the independence of all of those countries that were admitted to NATO. It is a sorry record and should place him among the ranks of our worst presidents because leaders should be judged by the consequences of their policies, not their “good” intentions. The voters who reject an America First approach to foreign policy are not going to vote for Trump in any event. And an endorsement of Harris by George W. Bush is unlikely to change any minds at this late stage in the campaign. But in the intellectual political bubble where Liz Cheney resides such an endorsement would be a confirmation that she has tread the right course in joining the very political forces that once called her father a war criminal. Politics indeed makes strange bedfellows. The post Would Bush’s Endorsement Help Harris? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.