Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: nhwingut; All
Makes you wonder what the criteria they used.

W made some questionable decisions. It's too early for "history" to judge Iraq or Afghanistan - the major hooks these critics focus on. Whatever you think of his drunken sailor spending or the wars, even now it's clear W's term is objectively not "bottom 5 all time."

He responded timidly in the face of an immediately undermined presidency (Gore & selected-not-elected meme) and but well to 9/11 terrorist attacks: the economy kept moving, American people were kept safe.

There were no world wars, no brink of human annihilation, no civil wars, no Great Depression, allies still allies, foes still quietly dithering, no internment camps, no conscription... the primary complaints about W's tenure are "high class problems" - largely just effete whining.

W was not a GREAT president, more middle-of-the-road in my book, but Heaven help us if we'd had Al Gore or Obama in 2001!

62 posted on 02/08/2011 6:41:15 PM PST by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: newzjunkey

Actually we probably would have a Reagan in office now if we had Gore in 2001.

Bush was a horrible president and a progressive. They are the problem...


63 posted on 02/08/2011 6:43:19 PM PST by surfer (To err is human, to really foul things up takes a Democrat, don't expect the GOP to have the answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson