Actually, without "bashing" Bush, a good argument can be made otherwise.
Bush has changed the nature of the debate. Reagan got people to consider the 'government isn't the solution. It's part of the problem.' He changed the question from 'what's the best way for government to handle such and so problem?' to 'should the government be involved in dealing with such and so?'
Bush has walked away from the Reagan approach and returned to the older Republican approach of 'we do it better'. For conservatives, like me, who believe in limited government, for all of Bush's fine character and integrity, he has done serious damage to the idea of limited government.
So, I suppose it depends on what your "agenda" is.
What I see here on this forum, are those whose ONLY agenda is limited government, and that is what results in the unmitigated hatred they have for him.
As a conservative who wants the government to shrink (but realistically doesn't know if that's possible), but whose main conserative thrust is personal responsibility, the sanctity of life, morality, lower taxes, the rule of law, and a strong military and a strong America, I have been far more pleased than disappointed with the job he has done.
And I submit that most of those whose only agenda is limited government, are not real conservatives at all, if their goal is to be able to do whatever they want to........to have license, and not just liberty.