“Everything you point to is an indictment on your side.”
Ah, the “I know you are but what am I” argument.
“The Bashing of Bush by Conservatives began in 2005. Conservatives played the RINO card in the 2006 election. Palin and MCCain both bashed Bush mercilessly in 2008. They got nothing.”
McCain and Palin are the best you can do? What’s your point anyway? That McCain’s bashing of Bush that lost him the election? Give me a break. How about that Bush so destroyed the republican label that Abe Lincoln resurrected couldnt have gotten elected on todays republican ticket? How about that McCain’s whole hearted embrace of Bush’s big government conservatism got him his loss?
“Bush was elected twice despite basically the same arguments and premises being launched by Kerry & Co.”
Uh, yeah the opposing party does tend to try to claim that the president sucks. Again, what’s your point? If its that its proof that Bush has to be a good president because the opposing party doesn’t like him, thats some pretty twisted logic. FYI, in no way did our criticisms of Bush match those of the liberals. We’ve been arguing that Bush was never conservative enough. Not exactly the dem party’s plank.
“People who attack Bush personally truly are fools. They are destroying the capacity of conservatives to rebuild.”
Who is attaching him personally? My very first post opening up this thread, I said that I thought Bush was a good man. As for destroying the capacity of conservatives to rebuild, if Bush was such a great president, then why is there a need to rebuild? Listen to yourself. That is about the most foolish statement I’ve read in FR for some time.
“As I have said in other posts, your crowd has the elementary school playgrojund metnality.
You think by announcing that Bush is not your friend anymore that Bush or some political unknown is going to give you what you want.
This ain’t grade school. Its time to grow up.
I do think by taunting Bush bashers in a personal way it helps clue them in about the mistakes they are making in political argument.”
You call me a fool, say I have a playground mentality, that I need to grow up and even admitt that you are taunting. Talk about childish. What flavor is that coolaid your drinking anyway little guy?
I think you are missing a key point here.
Bush was re-elected in 2004.
McCain never won. More conservative candidates failed to beat McCain.
Bush must have been conservative enough— he won in 2004.
Bush did not hand off in 2008 because he did not have a VP willing to continue. He gave Republicans a free agency option.
Unsaddled by our allegations, the Republicans were free to pick anybody.
I’m not sure but I think the Republicans lost in 2008— yeah I’m pretty sure that is right. You should have won your argument in 2008.
Its interesting that your about page emphasizes global warming. Bush derailed Global Warming for 8 years, but you could not care less.
There is a need to rebuild conservatives because moderates and faux conservatives have destroyed conservatism. Immigration has been given a false prominence. Bush bashing has become normative among conservatives— even though Bush has been extraordinarily successful as a President. If Bush is not a success, then no one can fill the ideals of being a conservative.
We are being reduced to unicorns and leprechauns because we keep having to imagine a Conservative who does not exist.
Bush increased Republican majorities in 2002— which was unprecedented. New Presidents almost always suffer losses in Congress.
The Bush not conservative enough argument has been made in 2006 and 2008. That argument failed.
Moreover, the effort to deny that he did any substantively conservative is hyperbolic falsehood. I am not going to repeat my 38 point list but Bush has massive conservative credentials whether you care to admit it or not. Moreover, we have to argue with anonymous internet posters who for all we know have done less than nothing beyond tapping on their keyboards.