Nobody gave me a review copy of Glenn Greenwald's A Tragic Legacy so I guess I'm going to have to go buy a copy. It has, already, however, started to spawn some interesting commentary. I think Matt Stoller, for one, is right to see how transient the current eclipse of Bushism is:
The fight over Bush's Presidency is ongoing, with a possible war with Iran in the cards. But even if we manage to prevent that war, the 'stabbed in the back' canard, which is extremely powerful, will be used to resurrect the conservative movement nearly instantaneously. That's why when Bush leaves office, the fight over his legacy will be ongoing, until the movement that put him there is fully discredited.
This is quite true. Matt's attitude, I suspect, is that progressives need to steel themselves for ferocious political combat, which is probably true. It also highlights, however, the need for ideas about national security with a little more depth and staying power than thin critiques of Bush's "competence" or his contracting policies but which actually leave much of his overarching theory unchallenged.