The prosecution of the WOT by itself is worth having him around.
Second...to point out just one area, he's the best pro-lifer we've had in office since Roe vs. Wade. Even better than Reagan. But then, we even have pro-lifers on this board who want to treat him like Satan.
To your paras:
No, it's not at all asinine! The "BS meter" is in fact raging on posts such as yours, not mine. Reagan faced the Cold War which had been going on for decades and knew how to defeat it. He didn't allow communists to fester within our nation. Bush has done a great job, phenominal in fact, led by military members as it should be, in Iraq and Afghanistan! But he's been absolutely pathetic here at home.
He's created an entire department with a name suggesting that it targets the same goals here at home, yet sees most of its funding going towards things utterly unrelated to even basic safety let alone terror safety and protection from terrorism. He doesn't appear to care who crosses our southern border.
Lincoln as well knew the threat to the nation but also didn't leave the back door open and executed the plan to success. Bush seems more concerned that Iraq and Afghanistan become a democracies than whether or not the United States continues to remain a viable Republic!
To para 2: It's a real shame that we're only doing a fraction of that prosecution of the WOT here at home, eh! Or perhaps your plans are to move to Iraq at some point?
At this rate there may be no nation to protect in 25 years. Do you honestly believe that if we have 150 millioin Mexicans and other foreigners actually living within the CONUS that our nation won't become some sort of socialist mecca? Please! Spare us both.
To para 3: He's been a great pro-lifer. But you know, at last check abortions were still legal in all 50 states! Or am I missing something.
Talk about a one-issue stance in a tug-o-war that isn't budging! Meanwhile, will it even matter whether this nation is pro life or not if we're overrun by Mexicans and the soon to be influx of other people from nations around the world that will be using Mexico as a "gateway to the US?" Or don't your sensibilities allow you to see that that's coming?
tThe fact remains that considering his job performance without 9/11 and the WOT is like considering Reagan without the Cold War, FDR without WWII, or Lincoln without the Civil War. For eaxmple, if one considers Reagan without the Cold War, there's some tax hikes and amnesty to deal with...but only an idiot would boil Reagan down to that.
But he's been absolutely pathetic here at home.
You're pegging the BS meter again. Go back and read the article, and tell me all those domestic decisions are "pathetic."
It's a real shame that we're only doing a fraction of that prosecution of the WOT here at home, eh! Or perhaps your plans are to move to Iraq at some point?
Um...are you aware we've gone four and a half years without a terror attack on our soil?
Do you honestly believe that if we have 150 millioin Mexicans and other foreigners actually living within the CONUS that our nation won't become some sort of socialist mecca?
I honestly believe my point was that his performance overall is very good. Sell your "immigration is not what it should be therefore he's a bad president" story somewhere else. In fact, while you're at it, let me know what any other president since Eisenhower has done to improve the immigration situation.
He's been a great pro-lifer. But you know, at last check abortions were still legal in all 50 states! Or am I missing something.
Oh, do you have a suggestion for what the Prez could do to outlaw abortion tomorrow? I'd love to hear it! I'd also love to hear where you think the abortion debate will be in 50 years if we can't get constructionists through the Senate because people like you handed the Congress to the Dems on a silver platter.