You just did it again. :-(
You ignored what I actually said, about "conservative = less govt/border security". Then started a long filibuster of an analogy that is so off base I'd have to spend a long post disagreeing with that straw man. I mean, child-rearing? Tough love? It's very simple -- 'conservative = smaller govt/tough on defense'.
Never mind, I appreciate your attempts to chat with me.
It would just be more productive next time if you'd actually in some way respond to the things I'm actually saying.
Did I not mention at some point that I believe that we'll have better border security in the long run by not building a wall, by not deporting millions of Mexicans, by doing all we can to support a stable Mexican government, by not doing things that will increase the likelihood of a Marxist regime on our border. I thought I said or suggested at least a few of these, but I suppose I did so in other posts.
If "conservative" implies "taking draconian measures," then Bush isn't one. But I don't think that's what it means, and that was what my analogy was trying to point out--we view the word "conservative" differently and in my opinion, Bush's position is more conservative in the long run, more likely to conserve freedom.