When I was invited to write at The Moderate Voice, a blog considerably larger and more buttoned down than my own, it became obvious pretty quickly that I would have to file down some of my rough edges – especially as they pertained to the language and images I used in writing about Mr. George Bush – if I was going to fit into Joe Gandelman’s estimable stable of co-bloggers.

So terms like “The Decider” and “Schoolyard Bully” were out and “The President” was in. Altered photos of “The President” in crown and kingly regalia or playing in a kindergarten sandbox were out and photos of “The President” at photo ops were in.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the Here and Now. Much of the rest of the world, as well as some of those TMV co-bloggers, have become so disgusted with “The President” that the measure of respect typically due a man of his station has pretty much evaporated. As a result, there has been a concomitant loosening of language and the use of edgier photos and especially political cartoons that I would have been gently chided for dredging up a few months ago.

I do not say this to brag on my prescience. I was only stating the obvious.

There is no greater drag on the national psyche in this summer of our discontent than a man that even many stalwart Republicans agree cannot leave Washington soon enough.

Even as snarky and unpopular as Bill Clinton could be, merchants were not marketing battery-powered chotchkies that counted down the days, hours and minutes until he left town. This summer they’re selling slews of them covered with caricatures of “The President.”

Earlier this year, Vanity Fair magazine ran a photo by David Hume Kennerly of the surviving members of President Ford’s inner circle. They all look appropriately senior statespersonly and include Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.

The photo prompted a letter from a reader who hit a very big nail square on the head:

“Looking at the picture of the denizens of the executive branch in the Gerald Ford administration, it struck me once again how good leadership brings out the best in people. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld dominated the photo and were well-respected public servants under Ford. The fact that they are considered failures today by a majority of our citizens has to be an indictment of the leadership of our current ‘decider’.”

George Bush came to office declaring that he was the right man for complex and troubled times.

But “The President” has failed make good on any of his promises — not a single one of consequence — despite a compliant Congress and a post-9/11 mandate comparable to that given FDR after Pearl Harbor.

The result of this failure of leadership has been disastrous — from diverting resources from where the big post-9/11 battle should have been fought to an unprovoked war against a favorite pre-existing neoconservative target to the federal response to the post-Katrina disaster in New Orleans and the Gulf Coast and everything in between.

“The President” has made a mockery of the separation of powers, fixated on secrecy to the point of obsession and robbed Americans of some of their most cherished civil liberties in the commission of a War on Terrorism ostensibly being fought to protect those liberties.

The judgment that awaits George Bush might not be so harsh had there been counterbalances during his tenure, say a successful domestic agenda. In fact, no domestic agenda since Herbert Hoover’s has failed so ingloriously and is so shot through with betrayal.

I cannot recall a presidential campaign in my lifetime where the question of leadership will be so important as the campaign now underway.

That is why I was drawn to a foreign policy speech earlier this week by Barack Obama. Journalists and bloggers obsessed on the Democratic presidential wannabe’s declaration that he would not hesitate to send troops into Pakistan and missed the underpinnings – his declaration that he would lead, not merely pay lip service to leading.

It is easy to see why “The President” was reportedly so peeved because of what Obama said:

“After 9/11, our calling was to write a new chapter in the American story. To devise new strategies and build new alliances, to secure our homeland and safeguard our values, and to serve a just cause abroad. We were ready. Americans were united. Friends around the world stood shoulder to shoulder with us . . .

“We did not finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan. We did not develop new capabilities to defeat a new enemy, or launch a comprehensive strategy to dry up the terrorists’ base of support. We did not reaffirm our basic values, or secure our homeland.

“Instead, we got a color-coded politics of fear. Patriotism as the possession of one political party. The diplomacy of refusing to talk to other countries. A rigid 20th century ideology that insisted that the 21st century’s stateless terrorism could be defeated through the invasion and occupation of a state. A deliberate strategy to misrepresent 9/11 to sell a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.”

Do I think that Obama has a shot at the nomination, let alone winning the election? I don’t know. In fact I don’t even know if I would vote for him.

But he set the leadership bar appropriately high at a time when George Bush has stood in the deep end of the pool for so long that it has taken most of us years to figure out that he can’t swim.