The Bush/Truman Paradox

Jay Ambrose says Newsweek is in denial over the obvious:

What the story most outlandishly refuses to do is accept the
right-before-your-eyes parallel between Truman and Bush. Truman was unpopular
for a variety of reasons, but mainly because of the war in Korea. Bush is also
unpopular for a variety of reasons, but mainly because of the war in Iraq.
Truman, the story says, made “the tough calls, and history has rewarded him for
it,” while arguing in meagerly qualified words that Bush’s resolve in Iraq is
unrealistic, foolhardy and stubborn...

Is it utterly inconceivable to the story’s writers that Bush’s
policies of fighting back against terrorism will some day be recognized as being
as crucial to world freedom as Truman’s policies were for containing communism,
or that we might see how the Iraqi war was simultaneously a tough call and a
wise call?

As I've written before, sometimes bias hate blinds us to the truth. Most of the anti-Bush rhetoric seems personal to me rather than based on any sound reason. Why else would seemingly rationale Americans endorse a disastrous cut-and-run before Al Qaeda in Iraq, after the cruel murder of 3000 innocent civilians on 9/11?