"The Bush Years In Perspective" (Part Five of Six)

IBD Editorials ^ | 8 June 2007 | IBD Editorials

[K-oneTexas]

In this exclusive, six-part series, we put the Bush presidency in perspective by taking a look at achievements in several key areas, including the economy, homeland security, Iraq, tax cuts and more.

---

Part Five

A Gentleman In The White House

Leadership: George W. Bush has suffered more barbs than any president since Richard Nixon. His critics could never display the decency he has shown for more than seven years on the national political stage.

---

Part Four The Singular Vision Of George W. Bush

The Presidency: Burdened by a Democratic Congress that can't see beyond the next election, at least the U.S. is blessed with a president with the ability to see a better future and the courage to take risks to achieve it.

---

Part Three Bush's Exit Strategy In Iraq Is Victory

The Presidency: George W. Bush, obeying a U.N. mandate, set out to dethrone a mass murderer and an aggressive tyrant, expand democracy and take the war on terror to the enemy. He's done all that and more.

---

Part Two Homeland Security: So Far, So Good

The Presidency: Addressing Congress just after 9/11, President Bush promised that "as long as the United States of America is determined and strong, this will not be an age of terror." Determination is what explains his perfect record protecting the homeland.

---

Part One Bush's Real Record On The Economy

The Presidency: Years from now, pundits and academics will surely wonder why President Bush's greatest achievement — his stewardship of the economy — got so little notice during his time in office. Yet that's how it is.

[K-oneTexas]

Part Five of Six

[Cringing Negativism Network]

George Bush = Jimmy Carter.

[r-q-tek86]

This is a great series.

[r-q-tek86]

George Bush = Jimmy Carter

What?!?

[trumandogz]

Will Part Six include articles on the Amnesty Bill, Campaign Finance Reform or No Child Left Behind or the Trillion Dollar Free Drug Program?

[Wonder Warthog]

"What?!?"

Yep, it's beginning to look that way. Bush II's Waterloo appears to be his insane insistence on granting citizenship to millions of criminals. Carter's was the Iran fiasco. And Bush I's was "no new taxes".

[K-oneTexas]

Have no idea. It will not be written till next week.

[r-q-tek86]

So you are going to say that George Bush’s presidency is equal to that of Jimmah Carter’s because he is trying to find a solution to the immigration policy?

I don’t like the fact that this proposal doesn’t require the illegals here to go to the back of the line or that it is weak on border enforcement... but Bush as bad as Carter?... really?

[ricks_place]

George Bush = Jimmy Carter.

Sir, I lived through the Carter Years; President Bush is NO (lust-in-heart, rabbit-fearful, Ayatollah-loving, Brezhnev-kissing, Olympic-canceling, peanut-brained, PLO-promoting, gasoline-rationing, stagflating, malaise-filled )Jimma Carter!

[ExTexasRedhead]

Personally, I’ve defended Bush for the last time. His immigration/amnesty fiasco sucks! The American people don’t want this shoved down our throats by DC “in your face” arrogant elitists. We are the ones that will suffer the consequences while the “rich” DC politicians live in their private compounds living off inherited money. What’s going on in DC is a disgrace to our heritage and a disgrace for future generations of Americans who will be forced to live in what will become a third-world cesspool.

I’ve worked on many Republican campaigns through the years; no more until the traitor RINO’s are gone.

[MattinNJ]

BTT for later read-thanks

[Weeedley]

The “solution” he is trying to seek is to defacto erase the mexican border so that none of the illegals are illegal. This is tantamount to the destruction of the national sovereignty of what used to be the United States of America.

This deliberate act is far worse than the giving away of the canal zone, a piece of US territory, by the worst president of the 20th century by far.

[mylife]

That is the singulary assinine I have ever seen.

[mylife]

That is the singulary assinine statewment I have ever seen.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

Good article, thanks for posting.

On the other side, I have a problem with:
1) Amnesty for illegal immigrants and overall negligence of border security, even going so far as to punish those who attempt to enforce border security or criticize his failure to do so. Kissing up to Vicente Fox.
2) Signing McCain's unconstitutional "Campaign Finance Reform" legislation.
3) Going along with rampant Republican pork barrel spending.
4) Pushing socialist nonsense like Kennedy's "No Child Left Behind" legislation, resulting in a massive increase in government.
5) Pushing socialist nonsense like the "Prescription Drug" legislation, resulting in a MASSIVE increase in government.
6) Prosecuting soldiers for doing their job. Prosecuting border control agents for doing their job. Calling the Minutemen "vigilantes".
7) Building a superhighway between Mexico and Kansas City with no discussion or explanation.
8) Nominating his secretary to fill a SCOTUS vacancy.
9) Not disclosing to the citizenry the actual fate of Saddam's WM, and not disclosing the complicity of France, Germany, and Russia in supporting Saddam's covert military and WMD programs.

[r-q-tek86]

See... and I thought that this was a place where we examined facts dispassionately and didn’t use wild hyperbole. “destruction of the national sovereignty of what used to be the United States of America” may be a tad bit over the top... dontcha think?

I don’t defend this bill, but I recognize that a solution becomes a pretty complex problem. “Close the border and ship’em out” is easy to say (and probably the ideal solution) but I don’t see it being that easy to do.

Before you start flaming away... take a breath and think for a minute. Advocating a bill that looks to be doomed to failure erases all the rest of Bush’s presidency? That’s the point you want to stand on?

The war... the economy... reduced taxes... homeland security... all that don’t count no more?

[vetsvette]

“I don’t defend this bill, but I recognize that a solution becomes a pretty complex problem.”

If the President thinks it’s too “complex” to enforce existing laws, he probably shouldn’t have taken the oath.

[K-oneTexas]

I agree with you. There are issues on which I agree with the President as well as issues I disagree with him on. However the agreement with him is on many more issues that with the Democrats and Kerry.

Issues that need attention are many and not necessarily limited to tax reform, border security, immigration reform, social security reform, medicare reform, a viable energy policy, health care (incl. prescription drugs) reform; just to mention a few. Mine are not there to exclude others, nor are they in any particular order. This is not an exhaustive list.

The next President will have a full plate to begin with and have to start running. If we elect a Democrat President and they retain control of the Congress none of these items will be fixed. Rather they will receive patches, not the kind conservatives want to see and they will result in a high cost. A high cost reflected in tax increases to the past high levels. Also, a Dem will insure a USSC swing further left.

If we elect a Republican President and the delicate balance in the House and Senate do not tip to Republicans or at least stay somewhere near a neutral position, there may be a chance to enact reform. Much of that depends on the Republican elected. He (I say he as no ladies are running) must be a conservative. And he must more conservative than just a moderate conservative or centrist. However, he can't be too far right as an 'extreme' conservative (in the voters eyes) will likely not garner sufficient votes nationwide to win.

Small incremental steps back to the right may be good (and our only hope) since I can't see any giant swing away from where we are.

[Weeedley]

If the southern border is not a functioning checkpoint for who gets into US territory than it follows that Amerixico is what you have. It goes farther than just advocating a disastrous bill, that got “put out of its misery” Congress passes a bill authorizing construction of a 750 mile fence signed into law; 2 miles are done and thats taking a year. This is dereliction of duty and criminally indefensible foot-dragging. He is breaking the law he signed by not building the fence; which he never intended to build because of his warped core values conflict with protecting the nation from the hoard of criminals swamping our land. Yes criminals. The crime rate is spiking up and now you know why.

[what's up]

Bush II's Waterloo appears to be his insane insistence on granting citizenship to millions of criminals. Carter's was the Iran fiasco.

Guess you conveniently missed all the positive things Pres. Bush has done.

Jimmy Carter did zilch good.