Both Democrats and Republicans are desperately trying to corner the youth vote - a segment of the population that, as a rule, has trouble getting themselves to the polls. (Darn kids.) But while the actual youth vote might be up for grabs, in one crucial way George W. Bush has a lot in common with millions of American teenagers: He has an identity crisis.

Well, perhaps that's not a fair statement. Mr. Bush certainly knows who he is. But it seems that some in the media don't. The question for certain commentators seems to come down to this question: Which past president does George W. Bush most closely resemble?

There's quite a case for a family resemblance. After all, Bush's father was the forty-first president. We have the benefit of a prior Bush administration to compare and contrast with the current one. The two president's backgrounds are certainly similar. Both are wealthy sons who belong to politically connected families. Both went to Yale. Both have presided over hostilities in Iraq. And, of course, both ties to powerful Saudi business interests.

But there is a crucial difference between just how George W. Bush and his father went to war. Bush senior has been praised for his coalition building in the days leading up to the first Gulf War. Once the team was in place actions began under a United Nations mandate. Junior on the other hand decided to take the nation to war with rather anemic international support - most notably was the "Coalition of the Willing's" lack Arab members. There was also no mandate from the U.N. Bush senior had an advantage, in that Iraq managed to anger the entire world by invading Kuwait. Too bad for his son that Iraq had been sitting around quietly for the past decade when war was scheduled to begin.

So, George W. Bush doesn't quite resemble his father as closely as some might like. Perhaps he's more like Ronald Reagan. Both his enemies and his supporters seem to think so. The problem is that Reagan's legacy has been devoured by ideologues on both sides. Democrats saw him as none too bright pretender with a knack for public speaking. To Republicans he's a little bit more than human - a saint whose name must be plastered on landmarks all over the country. In both cases, the man's myth has far outgrown his actual policies.

But one thing that is certain about Ronald Reagan: he was a hell of an orator. George W. Bush has proved time and time again that he does not excel at this particular art. Over the past four years, he's only given a dozen nationally televised press conferences. After the latest one even a few die-hard conservatives, like Bill Kristol, managed to find fault. Even if John F. Kennedy was the first true media president, Reagan at least perfected the archetype. It's safe to say then that Bush is not quite like Reagan.

Perhaps Bush has more in common with that albatross of the Republican party, Richard Nixon. His opponents certainly want you to think so, but the only person whose actually come out and said it was former council to Nixon, John Dean. He even went as far as to call his newest book Worse Than Watergate. In a slightly more subtle attack, Ted Kennedy tried to paint Bush with Nixonian colors by saying that Iraq was Bush's Vietnam. Bush supporters were quick to point out that Ted's brother was the guy who actually sent U.S. troops to that embattled nation, which deflected the comment somewhat. And unless we find out that we've been illegally bombing Syria or Iran, it's not likely that the accusation would be likely to stick anyway.

But, there's hope yet for a Nixon/Bush comparison. The Bush administration has spent the past 18 months trying to claim that the WMD debacle in Iraq was an intelligence failure, not a deliberate lie. Nobody would argue that Nixon deceived the American people - we have the White House tapes to prove it. But, lacking any evidence to the contrary, Bush can always hide behind the old, "it's not a lie if you believe it" canard. The problem is that several former administration officials keep coming forward to tell the American public that the president had been just itching to invade Iraq - justifiably or not.

The Nixon comparison by no means ironclad, but we can't rule it out as we did with the others. But don't be surprised of the Democrats choose not to press it very hard. After all, Nixon was a two-term president, and unless a miracle happens in this year's Congressional races, there's no hope for impeachment proceedings.

So, which president does George W. Bush most closely resemble? It will probably be years before we know for sure. As Bush administration officials often say, hindsight is 20/20. In the end history will decide how the we view his presidency. Of course, in November, we'll determine whether the Bush administration will be history or current events.

-B. C. Silvia -4/21/2004