Posted on 01/02/2013 7:10:28 AM PST by SeekAndFind
I agree 100% with everything you say.
If Terri Schiavo had been Terri Bush Schiavo, she would still be living. The Bushes are respecters of persons.
The HST record was really bad too, but Goldwater did a lot to resurrect the image of HST. We might have been better off with Thurmond, as Trent Lott once said but apologized and still got the GOP boot.
I agree completely. After Pearl Harbor, FDR had three immediate, critical tasks:
1. Protect the homeland.
2. Win the war in Europe, and in the Pacific.
3. Eliminate German and Japanese imperialism as a threat to the world.
Sure, FDR was weak in many areas, but he completed all three of the above, in less than four years!
Now consider Bush II after 9/11. He had to:
1. Protect the homeland.
2. Win the war in Afghanistan.
3. Eliminate radical islam as a threat to the world.
Bush had seven years, and he failed in numbers 2 and 3, failed miserably.
I'm sure Bush is a good person, and he'd make a great next-door neighbor. But his failures will haunt this country for generations. Like Vietnam, only much worse.
I met W once here in Texas when he was Gov.
He seemed like a really nice persona and was personable.
He just let the media win...
We wanted Regean and were sick of Clinton.
” Now consider Bush II after 9/11. He had to:
1. Protect the homeland.
2. Win the war in Afghanistan.
3. Eliminate radical islam as a threat to the world.”
And perhaps the worst of these:
1. Would anyone have argued on 9/12 with the need to properly secure the boarders?
2. Would anyone have argued with a program to make us not dependent on Middle East oil (drill baby drill).
3. And to recover from the financial disruption caused by 9/11, roll back the Clinton tax hikes PERMANENTLY.
I reconsidered him. He still sucked.
Bush was a disaster that the Republicans and America in general are a long ways from recovering from. His failure to stop illegal immigration alone should be the end of the discussion, all but assuring the death of the GOP and really all hope for restoring republican government by demographics. He destroyed any credibility the GOP might aspire to have on deficits.
His signature on the TARP bailout renders Republican claims to standing for free market accountability as just irrelevant prattle, not to mention that he should’ve stepped in to reign in Fannie and Freddie years earlier. Though I certainly shed no tears for Mullah Omar and Saddam, he committed the U.S. to exactly the kind of foolish nation-building that he campaigned against, and that inevitably results in failure amid massive losses of blood and treasure, especially when attempted in any past of the world under the sway of Mohammad. He never met a freedom he wasn’t willing to sacrifice for “security”.
The best that can be said for him is that he kept Gore and Kerry out of the Oval Office, which I suppose is no small thing.
When comparing W to FDR regarding war it's **essential** to point out that under FDR no Republican sided with Hitler or Tojo whereas,under W,a good percentage of the opposition party sided with our enemies...as was seen in Vietnam as well.
...and yet Bush's own 'bi-partisan' Iraq Intelligence commission deemed that the intelligence community had it wrong about Saddam's WMD program leading up to OIF, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary that had dems and republicans alike warning of it for over a decade prior.
This Bush family doctrine of post presidential politeness is handing Dems the keys to the revisionist bulldozer.
Think about the last Republican presidencies...Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, Bush. No one wanted to defend the Nixon/Ford presidencies. At the end of his second term, Reagan was done with politics and GHWB was a reluctant defender of Reagan's policies. Clinton quickly learned he could say anything about his predecessor, and nothing would happen. The press will repeat any accusation a Dem makes, and as long as the Bushes maintain their family policy of remaining "above the fray", Obama's absurd claims about the economy, and the Pelosi budget he inherited, are morphing into revised history.
True, but there was also sizable pro-German "America-first" movement back in 1941. FDR solved that problem by declaring war. Opposition to the war became treason.
Bush should have made it clear how serious he was after 9/11. As you said, 9/11 was another Pearl Harbor. Bush should have declared war.
So totally disagree with that. You haven't been enjoying the tax cuts?
I blame the GOP for the problems with conservative movement.
“Bush should have made it clear how serious he was after 9/11. As you said, 9/11 was another Pearl Harbor. Bush should have declared war.”
Bush went to ground zero against the advice of his advisers.
Bush got on top of a burned out fire truck - against the advice of his advisers - and spoke the only words of his that will be reprinted in history books.
Without asking his advisers, during impromptu questions Bush responded, “you are either with us or against us.”
Thus endith the actual GWB.
From that point on, he ‘listened’ to advisers.
And the rest is history (rather depressing history).
” Now consider Bush II after 9/11. He had to:
1. Protect the homeland.
2. Win the war in Afghanistan.
3. Eliminate radical islam as a threat to the world.”
on #1 - we now have DHS. It should go without saying but it is the most invasive freedom-crushing bureaucracy ever conceived, and is now in the hands of a communist wannabe dictator.
on #2 - he stated that “Victory would not be like our fathers or grandfathers.....” (WTF?) in Afghanistan - setting the stage for the disaster it is.
on #3 - he repeatedly defended “Religion of Peace” mantra that diluted his stated goal, and made it impossible to achieve.
What else ya got?
But Bush II had the Vietnam experience as a guide in what not to do. But Bush ignored it. LBJ's “win the hearts and minds” campaign became Bush's “nation-building.”
So, yes, I rate Bush II as a worse president than LBJ for that fact alone. Unlike Vietnam, Afghanistan simply had to be won decisively. Radical islam is MUCH more dangerous than Vietnamese communism.
I will now shut down my Bush-bashing machine for the day.
W and his father were both poor presidents and not actual believers in the conservative cause. Their damage to the GOP and the country has been substantial.
He couldn't, he was president.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.