Posted on 01/16/2009 6:31:14 PM PST by Delacon
“Do you think that I will be LESS critical of the one? :)”
I most certainly hope NOT. Zero is most deserving of your sharp analytical capabilities. And we all look forward to your future posts/rants. : P
Like I tell my kids. Mommy and I aren’t fighting(often over whether or not I should go to Home Depot or not), we are trying to work out what we should do next.
As you probably can see, I have been fighting this battle on multiple fronts for a long time. I actually am more confident than ever that President Bush has exercised superb leadership. My confidence has increased as I read literally dozens of critics try to explain why they disagree. I rarely encounter evidence associated with claims of Bush critics. They have heard something repeated so it is true.
Reagan is a good counter example since many Bush critics pretend that he represents an ideal and fair standard. Reagan meets known of the criteria for success. Reagan could have much more easily chose to end illegal immigration at a time that it was still manageable. He signed Simpson Mazolli and actively created the legal term now shouted in internent conversations as an epithet for Bush Amnesty!
Amnesty was literally invented by Reagan.
NCLB is fascinating study in pathology. Bush campaigned on NCLB. It is not something liberals foisted upon him. It was an important conservative principal which attracted conservatives to vote for him in 2000. He enacted his promise into law. Since the inception of the bill, Kennedy and other liberals have complained that the law lacks sufficient funding. It lacks sufficient funding because President Bush has adhered to conservative funding principals. In the previous system, the federal funding increased without strings attached. Now schoool must report their scores and a host of other information for parents. Most importantly, it has improved educational outcomes nationally since being enacted. The idea that it is not conservative is absurd.
here again Reagan is useful. Did education spending increase under Reagan— yes, by a huge amount. Did Reagan abolish the cabined post of education just created recently by Carter— No. Its absolutely absurd. There really are no standards for people who criticize Bush as not conservative.
If there is a standard it is simply this— Bush should abolish the Federal govenrment. Having not done that then he would be respected as a conservative.
Global Warming makes me wonder if you even read any news. Bush rejected the Kyoto protocol explicitly and repeatedly even after Clinton signed and executive order agreeing to it. McCain ran his campaign on this fact which makes it bizarre that you pretend Bush agreed to capitulate to GW. Again it does not matter what practical facts I point out, because you have some ideal in mind [perhaps the assasination of Al Gore— I don’t know] having fallen short of that ideal— Bush supports Global warming policies.
Nonetheless, in the arena of comparative alternatives— which actually is what politics is. Bush is a very strong conservative leader with credentials that surpass almost any leader we could list.
Again, the best refutation is to point to Clinton’s reduction of spending— which is entirely rooted in cutting the military. Is that what Conservatives think Bush should do? Clearly and surely this cannot be the case. The nation really is truely at war and we are actually getting it for a bargain compared to any war we have fought.
“He was bad leader.” Yes that is exactly right except he was a great leader. Otherwise you have interpreted the matter perfectly well.
Wow. You are so generous in your interpretations of Reagan crushing the Soviet Union but incessantly negative in interpretating Bush who actually did crush the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Saddam and Charles Taylor.
If Reagan did stop Khaddafi [the strike was supposed to kill Khadaffi] why did Khadaffi move forward and develop and extensive WMD program?
The answer is that Khadaffi continued to be involved it terror programs despite you wishful thinking. Bush actually killed thousands of terrorists instead of just talking tough and invading Grenada.
That one puzzled me a great deal when the news broke, then just faded in no time at at all.
Republicans should have learned how costly poor, and even non-existent communications from the WH, can be.
A lot of truth in the article.
And, precisely what were his views on amnesty?
Well, that illegals should have amnesty! LOL
Did he? We know Alito was not his first choice. His choice was Harriett Meirs, which caused a significant party uprising.
And, some say that Alberto Gonzalez was his first choice over Roberts, but that was thwarted less publicly.
W might not be due quite so much praise for his SCOTUS appointees, and those he forced him to change directions might deserve most of the credit.
Is it? Well, find a nice, sandy beach with deep sand in which to bury your head because it has only begun. As always, there will be endless looking back columns, and many books about the W years to come.
That flag don't represent career politicians like Bush or Obama, or any politician. That flag does not represent government, or government's twisted corrupt policies.
Why do you think the leftist and communist hate that flag?
That flag represents a united country, based on freedom and those that sacrificed and sweat for that freedom.
Put your flag back up.
Not at all what he said in a 2004 debate with Kerry. This thread's about dead, but I'll link it anyway:
Now, it's very important for our citizens to also know that I don't believe we ought to have amnesty. I don't think we ought to reward illegal behavior. There are plenty of people standing in line to become a citizen, and we ought not to crowd these people ahead of them in line. If they want to become a citizen, they can stand in line, too. And here's where my opponent and I differ. In September 2003, he supported amnesty for illegal aliens.
There's old W in 2004, chastising Kerry for supporting amnesty for illegals, and telling us how he opposed rewarding illegal behavior, and, of course, ole W opposed amnesty for illegals and Kerry didn't.
A little more than half way down the page, and there's W using those terms specifically designed to deceive: "amnesty" and all those references to "the line" people have to stand in that is never defined.
He lied like crazy during that debate, intentionally deceiving the voters. And, at that point, the amnesty debate had not heated up, and he knew the use of those terms would fool most everyone.
This writer is spot on. The last laugh would be if the Left prosecuted him for war crimes.
On the contrary, Bush's (albeit delayed and horribly botched) response to 9-11 and the post surge phase of the WOT are to his credit. Charles Taylor, I don't really give a shit about. Never have. Never will. Although I'm sure Liberia was just as tough a foe as Grenada.
Bush also cut taxes. Other than that, he was probably the worst president since Carter.
Horribly botched?
Did he hurt too many of your Taliban friends?
Every phase was incredible. Keep in mind, every single critic was proven wrong:
Levin: 10,000 troops die in Babdad in first six months
Biden: Iraqi troops will not be trained to supervise 2005 elections
Reid: The war is lost.
I can tell you why you don’t care about Liberia. Taylor killed more than 250,000 people. He sponsored horrific human crimes in Sierra Leone. His generals killed children in ritualistic acts before battle against civilians. His troops kicked around the schools of victims in post battle soccer matches.
Grenada was never on any human rights radar. Liberia had been a long term concern by almost everyone except you of course.
Liberia was probably closer to Somalia in difficulty. Unlike Bush and Clinton, This president was willing to see it through rather than cutting and running like Reagan, Carter, Clinton and Bush.
Keep in mind the military action on Liberia took place while we were invading Iraq. That is a huge step up on enemies believing we cannot defend two major fronts at once. We were active in Afghan and Iraqi war fronts and the US military still took out a leader stronger than Somalia.
It is not even close. As a military leader, Bush II surpasses everyone since Truman.
Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland for one and there were others.
Gotta love those foot in the mouth Bush hatahs.
Until the surge, it WAS a quagmire. Fortunately, someone got to Bush and got him to agree to the surge.
I can tell you why you don’t care about Liberia. Taylor killed more than 250,000 people. He sponsored horrific human crimes in Sierra Leone. His generals killed children in ritualistic acts before battle against civilians. His troops kicked around the schools of victims in post battle soccer matches.
And this was our problem because?
Its our problem because we are all human.
Its our problem because the world contains WMD.
Its our problem because this is the perfect environment for terrorism.
Its our problem the modern world is not George Washington’s world. We are not and never can be isolated.
Fallujah was retaken. Armor was placed on the humvees as fast as possible. Al Sader is absolutely irrelevant to Iraqi politics which as a Martyr he would have been much more relevant.
No response is false. Our soldiers and snipers have killed thousands of their warriors. The iraqi army has done the same.
Statements like yours have killed lots of American soldiers and innocent Iraqis.
Rumsfeld was awesome and completely succesful. Again, all of his detractors were at every step proven wrong. No civil war. Successful elections. Low casualties. Quick capitulation by Saddam. No sustained urban warfare.
Rumsfeld made Vietnam look like a joke. The effort by you and other reactionary liberals to make Iraq into Vietnam failed.
Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland for one and there were others.
Not to nit-pick here... but, Reagan bombed the hell out of Libya AFTER the bombing of Pan Am 103.... it was one of the main reasons for sending a missile in Kadafi's tent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.