The Vindication of George W. Bush

Hotair ^ | 05/05/2011 | Guy Benson

[Psalm 144]

“I recommend your reading Decision Points. Even if you disagree with every decision he made, you will more fully understand why he did what he did, and how his desire to follow Christ motivated him.”

I might do so, based on the reasons you give, and the fact that many of his calls in policy and personnel truly bewilder me. I cannot accept the rhetoric that Islam is a religion of peace, however. That is just dead wrong at every level.

[onyx]

PREFECT© article, graphic and comments by both of you!

The Marxist campaigned against everything President Bush and against President Bush himself, and now he ‘s trying to take full credit while still trying to prosecute CIA agents for the interrogations!

Ignore the outburts by the juveniles. They're OT. The subject is UBL/OBL, but do look at the key words to know that the punk couldn't control himself again. Maybe one day, FR will be for grown-ups only.

[Gene Eric]

>> Not historically accurate.

Keys and/or destruction?

[Gene Eric]

>> Except with regard to the Mexican border.

Agreed.

[DoughtyOne]

Why you... ;^)

Silence from here. That’s close enough for me. I agree.

[TheOldLady]

Keep That Smile On His Face
Donate Monthly

Sponsoring FReepers leapfrog0202 and another person will contribute $10
Each time a new monthly donor signs up!
Get more bang for your buck
Sign up today

Keep A.I. Laz alive.

[DoughtyOne]

You've been kinda schizophrenic on this topic, DO.

Yes, I do come off that way to a certain extent.  I do try to give Bush his due.  People are complex.  They're not one dimensional, I'll grant you that.

So yes, there are some things I appreciate about him.  There are other things that disturb me greatly about him.

He had some great instincts.  On the other hand he had some terrible instincts.

If you're one of us, do you double the budget of the Department of Education in your first term, knowing what we know about it?

If you're one of us, do you honor your oath of office related to Article IV Section IV?

If you're one of us, do you push through a massive new Great Society spending plan that will sap our nation for generations?

If you're one of us, do you put the onus for security checks on your own citizens, or do you limit entry into this nation of people from problematic nations?

If you're one of us and 19 Saudi Nationals who entered our nation on student visas takes out around 3,000 lives, and trillions of our infrastructure, do you sign on to have upwards of 30,000 Saudi nationals on our soil at any given time?

If you're one of us, do you trash Israel for responding to terrorists shooting missiles into it's frontier?

If you're one of us, do you remain silent for the most part as the Left destroys you?

There were times when a Conservative's gutt response would have served Bush well, but he took the opposite position.  I'm not saying this to be mean or destructive, but folks if we can't be honest between ourselves, what good is this forum?

What possible benefit would I be reaping as a Conservative, to take a guy to task unfarly?  I value my credibility with folks who see fault with Bush.  Sure, if we're being honest, I do.  I also value my credibility with folks who support Bush, when he's done something I can back.

And there you have it.  I give him credit when I can, and I really let him have it when I can't.  Folks, some of you backed the guy no matter what he was doing.  There was never a time when we could be honest about him, and that is most clearly exemplified by the fact that you're good naturedly taking me to task even years after he has left office.  What need is there for me to point out the good things he has done.  You folks smoked the forum with non-stop praise for over a decade.  It was up to me and other folks to try to be honest as we could be about what we saw wrong with him.  If there hadn't been the non-stop praise, I would have spent more time praising him.

But you've revealed enough in some of your posts to let us know that deep down you DO admire the character and courage of George W. Bush.

Yes, I do.  He is five times the man Obama is.  None the less, the educational part of Bush's responsibilities did not take place.  He simply didn't have it in him to champion Conservatism.  Number one, Bush in the Conventional sense of the term, was not a Conservative.  He wasn't fiscally.  He wasn't even a lock socially.  On some matters he was.  On others he wasn't.  The one area where he came off reasoned more often than not, was the military.

You can continue your bluster all you want now, but some where deep inside, you know President Bush is a man of immense character whose politics just don't line up with yours.

Okay, I will admit to thinking that Bush did have some decent character traits.  At the same time, I cannot state that he had immense charcter.  You can't stand by and watch our nation over-run, or watch our Department of Education indoctrinate our kids on a myriad of absoutely terrible topics, and be considered by me to have immense character.  The two are mutually incompatible.  Where this begins to be a problem, is when his politics don't line up with mine.  Yes, true.  Nobody is going to agree with me all the time.  None the less, when it comes to sovereignty issues, I get pretty darned testy.  When it comes to potential terrorists on our soil, I get pretty darned testy.  When Islamic acherents stand up on planes and play silly games, I expect our Justice Department to go postal.  When they don't, I'm going to get pretty darned testy.  When regions of our nation are turned into Tijuana in a matter of years, because foreign nationals are simply occupying MY homeland, I get pretty darned testy.  When a foreign nation is attacked with missles, I expect them to take corrective measures.  Why my president carps about it, I get pretty darned testy.  When a department of the government that has been trying to brainwash our kids on morals, homsexuality, and the issues related to the importance of the United States positive impact on the world get their funding doubled, I'm not going to just get pretty darned testy, I'm going to go postal in place over it.

What bothers me, is that people who claim to be Conservative think this is ever so unfair.  No, it isn't unfair.

He's not the bad guy you've built an internet reputation on ripping to shreds, and you know it. I would recommend that you stand on your own more often and don't worry about impressing the haters around here.

First of all, my reputation on the internet is the very last thing I think about when I deal with people here.  While I do try to be reasoned so both sides know they can converse with me, I tell it like I see it and let the chips fall where they will.  I have had my comments quoted on other forums for good and bad reasons.  I generally balance out my comments rather extensively.  If anything, my posts are longer than other people's, and I try to place them right next to the comments I'm addressing for clairty's sake.  I don't want people getting the wrong impression, but people are going to game my comments if they can and there isn't anything I can do about it.  I don't go to Leftist forums to participate, or even read.  If someone wants to know what I think, they'll have to come here and look around.  If they want to, they'll be able to see why I say what I do, and believe as I do.

The idea that I have built an internet reputation for ripping George Bush to shreds is ludacrust.  More often than not, I avoid Bush and Palin threads.  Two visions of either of these people are impossible to stand side by side here.  It gets ugly, and I'm just not into playing that game 24/7/365.  Once in a while I'll explain my thoughts on them, and move on.  And most often when I do it, there are very strong supportive comments on the thread already, and it's simply pointless for me to repeat what other have already said countless times.

If I happen across something said about Bush or Palin that I think is unfair, I jump in to defend them without hesitation.  If I were trying to build a reputation ripping either of them to shreds, I would never do that and you know it.

They're definitely not worth it, and there are only a handful left who still don't get it.

Look, there are plenty of people here who do not get it.  I'm not going to sit still for someone coming here and saying untrue negative things about Bush or Palin.  What you don't see is me talking to people behind the scenes, explaining why I see things a bit differently than they do.  I'm not a shoe-in to trash Bush or Palin by any means.  On the other hand, I have found it absolutely impossible to reason with either Bush or Palin die-hard supporters.  Literally everthing is explained away.  It's just a waste of time to do it.  I spend probably 2% of my time addressing them, and 98% of my time behind the scenes talking to folks who see problems with them, in ways intended to moderate views.  Moderating both sides should be my goal shouldn't it.  Nobody is perfect.  We should be able to address imperfections honestly.  We simply can't.

Strangely the folks who do see problems with Bush or Palin don't get angry with me for saying reasoned things for or against Bush or Palin.  Here, you have kindly taken me to task for daring to say negative things about Bush, even though I did say some nice things too by your account.  That is not the same thing is it.  I'm not saying that to be mean.  You were nice to me.  I'm simply trying to explain to you how some of us see it, who do see good and bad things concerning people you stridently support.

(btw, the talking point that Bush gave us Obama is just plain silly. You know enough historical fact to stop throwing that inanity around).

I want you to think long and hard about the two candidates in 2008, and tell me if you think Bush did a good enough job of communicating what sound U. S. policy should be during his eight years in office.  You had McCain and you had Obama.  Either way, WE WERE SCREWED.  Obama wanted to destroy our global influence, put us in our place, increase the Islamic influence in the U.S.  McCain wanted us to be a global partner, destroying our global influence, making us a part of the globalist socialist collective.  We would have forgone the Muslim part, but other than that I actually believe he would have closed Gitmo and pulled us out of Iraq and Afghanistan before this.  Republicans would have backed him.

Is it our president's job to use the bully pulpit to implement and defend Conservative policies and the U. S. Constitution?  Of course it is.  If done properly, you hand off the reins of power to a like minded invidual to carry on where you left off.  Part of your job is to cultivate people to replace you, so continuity remains.  When Bush left, he had all but destroyed his ability to do this.

McCain was even reticent to use him for campaign purposes.  Of course McCain was about the worst candidate I've seen other than the elder Bush.  The populace didn't want four more years of Republican rule even if that meant Obama would be voted in.  Whose fault was that?  If you think it was exclusively McCain's, I think you're being dishonest with yourself.

Look, you folks have every right to see Bush by whaterver light you want.  The problem for you, is that the farther out you get to defend him, the farther from the main-stream you get.  Eventually it beomes impossible for you to fathom that Bush is not seen by almost everyone, close to the same way you see him.

Bush killed us.  Despite him doing some reasoned good things, his administration wound down under a very dark cloud.  That's how too many people saw it.  It cost McCain independent voters.  And yes, McCain did too.  He was a jackass.  "You have nothing to fear from an Obama administration."  Bush wasn't railing on Obama and what he would mean for the nation.  McCain wasn't either.

Sarah was the only person defending the rhelm.  She wasn't enough.  If McCain or Bush had grown a spine in the last six months before the elction, I think we would have had a good chance.  Niether did, and here we are.

The Democrats were making hay off the failed lending institutions framing it as the Republican's fault.  They pinned the whole economic slide on Bush.  Did Bush push back?  No.  They were out there railing on our party non-stop.  Who countered their treachery?  Who had the loudest voice to do it?

How on earth can you let things slide to the point that your own party will pick a guy as sordid as McCain to replace you?  How can you possibly remain silent as the primaries go along and McCain gains and retains traction?  Why did it not occur to Bush, that the worst possible electoral situation I've seen in my 40 adult years, was not acceptable?  And yet, he watched that whole thing take place as quiet as a church mouse.

This wasn't just your natural change of power.  This was a handing over of the reigns of our nation to a person who favored Islamic nations over the West.  And then there was McCain too.  Cringe.  And yet, Bush couldn't muster the gumption to warn our party members against this train wreck.

Was it totally Bush's fault?  No.  Did Bush do anything at all to stop it, let alone put his full force behind stopping it?  No.

I'm sorry, but it's my take than in large part, Bush is responsible for who replaced him.  I understand your dismissal of that opinion.  I'm not going to fault you for it.  That's none the less how I see it.

I appreciate your comments.  I believe there are grounds for us to agree on a number of issues.  There are others we'll just have to disagre on.  Take care.

[ohioWfan]

It's a good read no matter what your perspective. As a pro-lifer I was especially intrigued by his stem-cell decision and what went into it. He's a very thoughtful man, and strongly committed to doing the right thing at all costs.

As for the ROP, I don't know if you're old enough to remember and appreciate the horror of those days after 9/11, but his outreach to moderate Islam (I know that can be argued) was, IMO, an absolute necessity to prevent a bloodbath in the streets. Even though we all know that there is violence in Islam it was critical to prevent further violence in this country between Muslims and the rest of it and he did it by making sure that the world knew we were not at war with all of Islam (and we aren't).

And if you look at the history of what happened and how calm it remained here, you can see that what he did worked.

[ohioWfan]

Wouldn't that be lovely if only grown-ups posted here? Think how much more productive these threads would be. :)

And yes, they saw the topic and jumped in without a thought, nor any plan to actually READ THE ARTICLE.

Speaking the truth about the vindication of President Bush's prosecution of the WOT is like waving a red flag.

BUT.......on topic, YES. The Marxist campaigned against every single thing that led to the successful raid on OBL, and he has continued to bad-mouth THE President since he's been elected, and now is trying to take ALL the credit for the success of our military, CIA, and the Bush accomplishments.

I've said it elsewhere, but it would be as if Harry Truman had been vocally opposed to our military, our intelligence and FDR all through WWII, and then when he became President and dropped the bombs took all the credit for winning the war.

The whole thing is an utter absurdity. As stupid as I know he and his minions are, I still can't believe they're trying to pull this hoax off.

[ohioWfan]

I appreciate your comments. I believe there are grounds for us to agree on a number of issues. There are others we'll just have to disagre on. Take care.

Thanks. You too.

(Forgive me for not responding to your entire post, my FRiend, but my eyes are not good and your font is light so I'm having trouble reading it).

You do know that I disagree with some of the things that Bush did (just as I disagree with some of the things Reagan did). I'm an educator who really hoped that RR would fulfill his campaign promise to get rid of the DoE. Haven't changed my mind on its value since the department was created. (i.e. NONE).

I think perhaps one of the problems with communication here is that, if we opposed the mindless, childish, angry bashing of President Bush (not accusing you - but others for sure), it was interpreted as being in agreement with everything he did. Not so.

Many, many, many of us disagreed on specific issues (spending, immigration, etc.) but fought against the vile, infantile hate-filled spamming of threads that went on so often around here (and has happened even on this very thread, btw).

I am PROUD of my unflagging support of this man of impeccable integrity, and as I watch him in his post-presidency, I continue to be impressed with his love for others, his support of our military, his support of freedom, his love of country and his love of his Lord.

No disagreement on any issue is going to change my understanding, having watched him carefully for 10 years, of who this man really is. As I have observed others commenting on FR, I can truly say that I am more consistently conservative than almost anyone else (though not as angry as some), and that the people who hate the President most are, by and large, not across the board conservatives. Conservatism - the real thing - requires rational thought, and people who think rationally do not hate this man.

I am very, very happy to see the recognition of his strength, the compliments from people who were very critical, and the understanding of almost every conservative that he provided the strength that America needed when we needed it most.

Jehovah Jireh. And at the time of our direst need, HE provided George W. Bush.

[STARWISE]

The world knows, Americans know .. and sane FReepers know that our freedom from another attack after 9/11 is due to the resolve, focus, programs and devotion to Mission #1 by President Bush, and relentless pursued and executed by our incredible intel pros and awesome military.

The program President Bush authorized to decimate Al Queda and the beasts in the terrorist networks DIRECTLY underlays the entire trail of clues that absolutely led to the successful takedown of OBL from this earth, thank God, with BHO's correct decision and the breathtaking skill of the Seals.

SINCE THE ENTIRE ARTICLE IS EXACTLY ABOUT PRES. BUSH'S POLICIES BEING VINDICATED BY OBL'S RECENT SEA CRUISE, those who refuse to stay on topic and admit that obvious fact like standup Americans .. and look at the many laughable twirpings of the clot of naysayers here .. are clearly so terminally infected with BDS or .. possibly .. just plain willfully IGnorant .. but assuredly acting out like petulant children.

Since most seem to be able to string more than two words together, it appears they have a brain-wide, raging, oozing, chronic mental disorder that totally blocks clear thinking on the subject.

It's almost comical, if it weren't so sick and such a distortion of reality .. they can't even stay on the topic of the article and thread without their disease robotically detouring them and devouring their logic!

I think that's how one knows it is an undeniable mental disorder .. their comments are thoughtless, kneejerk and overreactive responses ... all done in the face of proven and documented reality.

Recovery is simple: REALITY .. but they persist in choosing this insane and nonsensical delusion.

They have now sequestered themselves here to the isolation ward of inane wackos, bumbling fools, and most certainly: THE ASH HEAP OF HISTORY.

[luvie]

Oooooooooo......I’m sooooo gonna be stealin’ that graphic!!!

[Wolfstar]

No way to prove it, of course, but I’m convinced at least some of them are Democrats here pretending to be conservatives in order to foment division among us. Yesterday one admitted to me that s/he is not a conservative, but a radical. Most radicals are on the far left politically, or so far on the fringe that they essentially are anarchists and/or seditionists.

The term “true” conservative is thrown around here a lot (mostly to silence or marginalize opposition to them), but at least in this one person’s case, s/he totally rejects conservatism. S/he doesn’t want to preserve (conserve) the republic and constitution, but overthrow them.

[Wolfstar]

No way to prove it, of course, but I’m convinced at least some of them are Democrats here pretending to be conservatives in order to foment division among us. Yesterday one admitted to me that s/he is not a conservative, but a radical. Most radicals are on the far left politically, or so far on the fringe that they essentially are anarchists and/or seditionists.

The term “true” conservative is thrown around here a lot (mostly to silence or marginalize opposition to them), but at least in this one person’s case, s/he totally rejects conservatism. S/he doesn’t want to preserve (conserve) the republic and constitution, but overthrow them.

[ohioWfan]

Wow! Yes on ALL counts, STARWISE!

THIS paragraph deserves repeating, since the offenders clearly didn't even look at the article, thus making their purpose on this thread only to disrupt rational conversation....

SINCE THE ENTIRE ARTICLE IS EXACTLY ABOUT PRES. BUSH'S POLICIES BEING VINDICATED BY OBL'S RECENT SEA CRUISE, those who refuse to stay on topic and admit that obvious fact like standup Americans .. and look at the many laughable twirpings of the clot of naysayers here .. are clearly so terminally infected with BDS or .. possibly .. just plain willfully IGnorant .. but assuredly acting out like petulant children.

The thing is that the vast, vast majority of FReepers have NO respect for this little "clot." They are completely irrelevant at best, and an albatross around the neck of conservatism at worst, and they don't seem to care. They spread their disease anyway no matter how stupid they make themselves look.

It's quite remarkable really.

[ohioWfan]

No way to prove it, of course, but I’m convinced at least some of them are Democrats here pretending to be conservatives in order to foment division among us

Bingo! No way to prove it as you say, but when one has no apparent purpose other than dividing conservatives on a conservative board, it's a logical conclusion to draw.

Leftist trolls, harming conservatism deliberately.

[leapfrog0202]

What a difference between how Bush dealt with things and how dumb0 does. I am not saying Bush was perfect - he wasn’t, but I’d give a lot to have him back to replace this idiot we’re stuck with.

I hope to heavens we get a good, strong conservative candidate that can wipe the floor with dumb0 and will come out swinging rather than a wuss like McLame.

[STARWISE]

;) (ONE THING - just save it to your ‘puter, please ..;) Quite a shock I got when my online image sharing site said the view (uses) put me over their bandwith parameters .. and one photo had 8,000 ‘views’ ???!!!!!) I think someone just stole my link and is using it, and it’s caused me all kinds of grief. DANG THEM!! So, I’d sure appreciate you saving it to yours to reuse .. THANK YOU !!)

[luvie]

I always do! :) But thanks for the reminder!

[luvie]

that skeered me! :)