Replies

We gave our time and money, so when you say he won the election you need to understand that he did it by espousing a conservative agenda. Is it too damn much for us to ask the President to live up to his promises.

Bull...hockey.

I remember the debate here during the 2000 primary. A whole lot of Freepers were not happy with Bush because they thought he was too moderate. They were nervous about the whole "compassionate conservatism" thing. And it was readily acknowledged that he was more of a moderate than was his brother Jeb. We knew all of that in 2000.

This stuff about him going back on all his promises is a load of bunk. Aside from CFR and steel tariffs, we basically got exactly what we elected. Was "No Child Left Behind" something that we shouldn't have expected? He pretty much campaigned on that. And he told us he'd do prescription drug coverage as well. Again, none of that was a surprise, so to say he campaigned as a "conservative" and that he hasn't "lived up to his promises" is not accurate

In 2000, we were so terrified of the prospect of the CLinton legacy being continued by Gore that we valued electability over conservatism. In 2004, we had to go with the sitting President, and valued his position on the war. And that was after he failed to veto CFR, expanded the Department of Education, etc.

I'm not saying that we were right to have supported a moderate. I'm just saying that accusing the guy of going back on his promises is bogus.

George Bush was a fiscal moderate, and a social conservative if you feel like getting technical on the issue of politics. We knew he wasn't a Reagen when he wanted "no child left behind" and the Prescription drug plan for Medicare recipients, but we also knew EXACTLY where he stood on social issues, and it sure as hell wasn't a Harriet Meirs he was espousing back then. Grow up and realize he's just a frigging man for God's sake. He makes mistakes just like the rest of us.