Generally, no. It's too much like work for their taste.
Or is their ignorance of the political process the reason they sit on their butts and take pot-shots?
Gee, what do YOU think? :o)
Without siding one way or the other on the issue of the article, I was wondering something. Those who appear to be in support of Bush on this issue have not made a single statement to refute this article. There have been several posts filled with ad hominem and insinuation of such.
When people like the NOW gang support Clinton and even go so far as to make excuses for his sexual perversion and further more attack the victims, everyone here sees clearly that the NOW gang and their ilk do not believe what they say they do, but rather only support democrats. Yet when the same issues are raised against a republican president, the very people who would be outraged were it a democrat are supportive to the extent of being hostile to those asking questions.
Now if you want to say Bush is a good president and that he is a far better president than Clinton was or Gore would have been, I can agree wholeheartedly. I would even help to enumerate the multitude of ways. But those of you who come here and start calling names and offer no debate and stick your heads in the sand are shameless and deserve no support. Bush has not been a domestic conservative. I don't believe that Bush is a domestic conservative. If someone can show evidence that he is, please post it, but the namecalling just proves you are nothing better than the R version of the average RAT.