Posted on 05/21/2006 12:53:53 AM PDT by FairOpinion
President George W. Bush strides across the world stage as much as the U.S. dominates the world's stage.
This is very good news for those of us who still believe in decency and democracy.
So forget what some slanted opinion polls say about the leadership of the 43rd president and his patriot countrymen.
Recall, Sir Winston Churchill was once one of the most detested men in Britain, then went on to save the free world.
That's Churchill's undisputed legacy.
In another era it may be Bush's legacy, too.
This past week, Australian Prime Minister John Howard, one of America's strongest allies, was in Washington on a state visit.
He was hailed by one and all in the nation's capital.
Later, Howard was in Ottawa to visit America's latest allies, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the newly elected Conservative government of Canada.
And we all know British Prime Minister Tony Blair is also one of Bush's -- and America's -- strongest allies.
Bush and America have many other allies throughout the world, too, although to read the nauseating Lib-Left news media, one would get the impression Bush is a pariah and America a rogue state.
Well, would you rather have the likes of Communist China, Communist North Korea, or Communist Cuba soldiering the world?
How about Middle East sheikdoms such as Iran, Libya, or Yemen running the show.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has already let it be known when his nation gets its hands on nuclear weapons he will use them against the Western democracies.
North Korea's president Kim Jong-il boasts he already has nuclear weapons and is building intercontinental ballistic missiles to carry them to western countries.
Back in the 1960s, Castro tried to install Soviet missiles on his island nation aimed at Canada and the U.S.
Do you honestly believe Bush, Blair, Howard and the like do not have a duty to safeguard us against these types.
Or would you rather have a stack of African dictatorships in charge -- nations ravaged by tribal warfare with their hands constantly out for billions of dollars in western aid that invariably is used to build luxurious palaces and deposited in secretive Swiss banks.
Vladimir Putin's Russia is a mess -- democracy there is in danger -- and old Soviet-style hawks want to take it back to the days of Stalinism.
Many of its non-Eastern European vassal states are in a mess, too, governed by local chieftains.
In Latin America bullies such as Venezuela's Hugo Chavez are on the rise.
Their hero, Fidel Castro, lives in luxury while his people continue to live under decades of food rationing.
India and Pakistan -- always at each other's throats, and courtesy of past Canadian Liberal regimes loaded with nuclear missiles -- pose a constant threat to that part of the world.
In Italy, we just lost Silvio Berlusconi, one of Bush's and America's best friends, in favour of left-winger Romano Ponti, and we don't know where he stands on preserving the international rule of law.
In Spain, when the Conservative government of Jose Maria Aznar fell, and Socialist Jose Zapatero came into power, the Spanish quickly capitulated to Islamic terrorist blackmail.
Thankfully, NATO and Norad are still holding together, and some perceptive Europeans leaders are even talking about a missile shield against rogue nations similar to the one proposed by Bush and rejected by weak-kneed types such as the Jean Chretien/Paul Martin Liberals.
Gutless, every one of them.
Talk about 21st century Neville Chamberlains!
So we're left basically with Bush, Blair and Howard and whatever smaller nations such as freed Soviet slave states in the European Union can pull together.
Yes, we've all read in the midst of this international war on terror that Bush has slipped this month to an all-time low in opinion polls at just 29%.
But recall that back in 1951 during another war on terror -- the attempt to prevent Josef Stalin's hordes from advancing into Western Europe and the all-out effort to save South Korea from advancing Communist North Korean forces, backed by Red China -- Democratic President Harry Truman fell to 23% in the polls.
The anti-America mobs can howl all they like, but I'm sticking with Bush, Blair, Howard and other true leaders of the western democracies.
I hope you are, too.
I'd like to but I feel so stabbed in the back right now. :(
I am sure you would feel so much happier with Hillary, or Al Gore...
Yes, it's a great article! It reminds me of news about a young citizen of India who was buried with US military honors. He fought for our USA and was killed in either Iraq or Afghanistan (can't remember which, offhand). He probably felt similarly to the author of the posted article.
Uh. Yah.
Most of Bush's policies are too liberal for me.
I think we all know how you feel, thats why this article is a good reminder.
I still think years from now when we forget our immediate disappointments and start looking at the Bush presidency in the big picture (which is the real picture for Presidents), we will see him as a man Reagan would greatly approve of.
By inviting the Nazis to come live in Britain?
Right through the open back door!
The man has made bold decisions and has left a lasting positive impression. The alternatives would have been terrifying.
Wonder who we'll be stuck with for 4 years after Bush...
Most of Bush's policies are too liberal for me.
And "the world" thinks Bush is too conservative. If you say your thoughts honestly in front of a group of Heidelberg University students, or in downtown Helsinki you will be laughed off at best, or threatened at worst.
And Hillary's policies aren't too liberal for you?
This is a good article, but we need to get someone to succeed W as he CAN"T run again.
W could be more help with this.
Who, George Allen? Tom Tancredo?
Just because they did it before, terrorists wouldn't dream of taking advantage of our toothless enforcement of immigration laws again.
/sarcasm
I hope you are right. I hope Bush will do great things before his term ends. I have to be very honest and say I have little hope. Unfortunately, my disappointments are not immediate; they have been growing slowly over the last three years. Some say he’s the best we have right now, but to me that's just settling for mediocre, at best. At this point, I continue to hope for the best, but expect the worst.
Huh? Where did I say I support Democrats?
"that's just settling for mediocre"
===
Just exactly who do you think could have done any better than President Bush, in face of all the crises and challanges?
You are really living up to your screen name.
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.