I guess I should defend myself :-P The reason I supported him 100% was because I was happy with him for a term and a half as governor. I got to meet him once back when he was Governor, I thought he was a nice guy and sincere (and still is) and truly believed in what he said and did and was a true Conservative.
My support started eroding over the past year. He is a different person than when he was Governor. He has said several things and then went opposite of what he said. I don't think that's the real him, I think that's the people around him influencing him (call me idealistic). Either way, he is not the person I voted for. I don't like double-standards. I still support him on a few things, don't get me wrong, but the list grows smaller week by week.
He has become the consumate politician. It's the nature of the office if you want to stay in power for more than one term. I can't fault him for that, but I also don't have to agree with it.
I wasn't attacking, I was making an observation that may explain the disconnect many of us are having in reaction to Bush.
From the outset I thought of Bush as Bush Lite. I didn't trust him to be anything but a repeat of his Daddy. Slowly he gained my respect that he knows how to outsmart the Rat's and I began to appreciate his strategic ability. I maintain that strategy is one of his major strengths and I would never wager against him in chess or poker.
As far as his posistions, I never felt thrilled with them. They were better than the alternative but hardly as strong as I would have liked say compared to the Gingrich revolution.
But getting to the main point, my expectations of George Bush was far less than 100%. I can appreciate that someone who supported him at that level would be deeply disapinted. But from my vantage point he is about on par with my expectations.
I wonder if its our original expectations that divides us on how we see Bush more than anything.