The Vindication of George W. Bush

Hotair ^ | 05/05/2011 | Guy Benson

[sickoflibs]

It's been a while but let me give this a try:

“All you are mad about is disagreements you have with president Bush's policies and results. No one agrees with him 100% but it's his character that counts, not his policies and actions and results as president. It doesnt matter if he expanding the government, ran up the national debt, promoted homeownership to minorities with bad credit(who later got forclosed on), bailed out the banks and GM, turned the Republican label into a joke, supported and signed green mandates into law, got voters to support Democrats on every issue, got Pelosi as Speaker and Obama as president with a $500B TARP slush fund handed to him. None of that matters, he has good character, but more important I met him and he gave me a kiss. That should be enough for you. I feel sorry for you..you are so petty.not like me I am serious...BLa-Bla-Bla.. the sky is blue...the trees are green...the ocean is red... I have to go now, the little red men are coming for me again.”

man, this is like a class reunion, we need more of these threads :)

[STARWISE]

http://tinyurl.com/3fddtsl

[DoughtyOne]

;^)

[DoughtyOne]

Specific? I think you’re going to have to be more specific, if you want anyone to think I have supported Obama being in the White House. Just link me to where I expressed that thought.

[sickoflibs]

Here's another gem I couldnt make up:

“They have finally made their big mistake. Posting comments on our ‘I love Bush’ thread calling him out as a big government liberal. We have never seen them do that before. It doesn't matter what they say. They are irrelevant. What they say means nothing. So write down their names for future reference. They are marked in stone in my head. I will never forget. I have IDed them like a mental tattoo in my head. Enough is enough!” ref : #86

Is this the first time we have complained about GWB here? Was it all a dream?

[DoughtyOne]

Woofie, George Bush will. His complete record will. Sadly.

That’s what you might want to give some thought to.

The good, the bad, and the ugly will be there.

I’ll be long gone, and Bush’s record will still be there for everyone to see.

Good luck with that.

[sickoflibs]

RE :;^)

And another one launched out of the tube.

[Republic]

I'm just soooooooo sorry President Bush wasn't perfect.

But he stood for what matters while fighting two enemies...TWO...at home (the MSM) and the terrorists, while keeping us safe and providing for the slaughter of Bin Laden with his amazing foresight. He never complained and he never degraded anyone.

Nanny him all you need to, but I miss him and I miss the example that he set.

Most of all-I love the way he loved this nation and our TROOPS!

[sickoflibs]

RE :”I’ll be long gone, and Bush’s record will still be there for everyone to see. Good luck with that.”

I agree with that Bush-bot, err fellow freeper. What business do you have being critical of president Bush when you have never been president yourself? That is completely unreasonable. You should never be critical of a president unless you have been president yourself .... Wait, did you just ask ‘what ABOUT Obama??’ Well of course you can complain about him without being president, or mayor, or meter maid, that's completely different.

[rabscuttle385]

Remember their names for the future. I am.
Enough is enough.

And now you know why I stopped contributing to FReepathons.

[Majie Purple]

WOW! Awesome ping,Thanks, *

GOD bless America!
GOD bless US Troops( incl.
Navy Seals FT. Campbell,KY)!
&GOD bless President Bush!

[hosepipe]

I flame Bush here.. nowhere else..
The fact Bush is not stupid means he does things ON PURPOSE..
This to me is worse than being stupid.. he's maleficent...

[DoughtyOne]

I appreciate your comments. I believe there are grounds for us to agree on a number of issues. There are others we'll just have to disagre on. Take care.

Thanks. You too.  (Forgive me for not responding to your entire post, my FRiend, but my eyes are not good and your font is light so I'm having trouble reading it).

My light font is merely a repeat of your post, paragraph by paragraph.  If you can't read it, take your mouse and highlight it.  It will be reversed on screen, and it will be a lot easier to read.

You do know that I disagree with some of the things that Bush did (just as I disagree with some of the things Reagan did). I'm an educator who really hoped that RR would fulfill his campaign promise to get rid of the DoE. Haven't changed my mind on its value since the department was created. (i.e. NONE).

That issue hasn't been on my radar, but if your reasoning were made clear, I might join you.  I'm not a big fan of Presidential Departments as a general rule.

I think perhaps one of the problems with communication here is that, if we opposed the mindless, childish, angry bashing of President Bush (not accusing you - but others for sure), it was interpreted as being in agreement with everything he did. Not so.

In some cases I agree with you.  In others I do think we can safely say nothing negative is acceptable.  I've seen way to much evidence of that not to recognize it for what it is.  People are going to do what they think is best.  You can't convince them it isn't productive.  It's not my cup of tea so I avoid it the vast majority of the time.  And no, I'm not directing this to you either.

Many, many, many of us disagreed on specific issues (spending, immigration, etc.) but fought against the vile, infantile hate-filled spamming of threads that went on so often around here (and has happened even on this very thread, btw).

I do think there is frustration on both sides.  I think this causes both to overplay their hand to a certain degree.  I'm not going to address it more than that.

I am PROUD of my unflagging support of this man of impeccable integrity, and as I watch him in his post-presidency, I continue to be impressed with his love for others, his support of our military, his support of freedom, his love of country and his love of his Lord.

I want you to know something.  In private life, I'm not going to take Bush to task for things I was compelled to take him to task for when he was president.  Unless he makes a policy statement backing something I disagree with, his love of people and his relationship with God is his business.  I respect that.  Unfortunately, when you're the CIC, you can't rule by always granting the opposition a GP rating no matter what they do.  Sadly, in many instances, they truly don't mean well, and you have to go after them.  The Left does not play by Hoyle rules.

No disagreement on any issue is going to change my understanding, having watched him carefully for 10 years, of who this man really is. As I have observed others commenting on FR, I can truly say that I am more consistently conservative than almost anyone else (though not as angry as some), and that the people who hate the President most are, by and large, not across the board conservatives. Conservatism - the real thing - requires rational thought, and people who think rationally do not hate this man.

I do think there is some misconception on by sides here.  You state that a lot of Bush supporters really do get the border and spending thing.  Honestly, I haven't seen that.  When I took him to task on those issues, I got plenty of guff for it.  Some of the people who take Bush to task, are convinced they are going to get attacked for doing it, so they don't mince words and it seems like they hate him far more than they do, if they do at all.  There are also people who go a long way back with Bush, and they never saw him the way you do.  They knew he was going to do certain things they couldn't sign on to, and regretted him getting elected from day one.  While you can reasonably disagree with that take, I am not convinced they are any more unreasoned than you are due to their take on things.  You folks just see things differently.

I am very, very happy to see the recognition of his strength, the compliments from people who were very critical, and the understanding of almost every conservative that he provided the strength that America needed when we needed it most.

As I said eariler to you, or perhaps someone else, if you step into a thread where most people won't allow anything negative to be said about Bush without going for the throat, are you going to jump into that thread and make glorious rosy comments that have already been made five to twenty times, or are you going to voice the objection you would like to see addressed?  If these threads were not so incredibly lop-sided  in favor of Bush, and for some things that are certainly deserving, I think you would see a lot more people joining you to make the occassional favorable comment about him.  It would be mixed in with comments that were about 50/50 favorable and unfavorable on policy.  I doubt you'll agree with the ratio, but I do think there are legitmate questions to be raised.  I don't see that as negative though.

It has always been my premise, that it would be very healthy for Bush to see some reasoned objections to some of his policies, and why those objections made sense to people

It could have helped him avoid making some mistakes.  It works both ways too.  A healthy pro/con environment can help him see the issues broken down in a reasoned manner.

Good presidents don't want yes men around.  They want team players, but people who can think outside the box and at least present alternative ideas, even if they are over-ruled in the long run.  That's the way I've always seen objections here, as long as they were reasoned and could be debated reasonably.  I do admit that this doesn't always work due to problem people on both sides.  I've actually gotten worked up at times and not argued productively.  Hey, it happens.

Jehovah Jireh. And at the time of our direst need, HE provided George W. Bush.

While I don't have a problem with that in concept, it has been my experience in life that when we want something very bad, we often think it's God's will for that to take place.  I'm not trying to give you grief over Bush on this topic, because I don't want to make those types of arguments regarding him.  God's will is not always as easy to see as we would like to think it is, and I don't want to speak for Him regarind this man.  It's not an argument that I think men should argue definitively on a person that has good and bad traits.  That's just my take on it.

Hey, thanks for the response.  I appreciate the exchange.

[hosepipe]

[ Is this the first time we have complained about GWB here? Was it all a dream? ]

Bushbots.. is an accurate term.. I used to be Gingrich bottish.. so I know the feeling.. After much consideration it remains like this..

You can remove the democrat from the party but its damned hard to remove the democrat from the democrat.. It happens sometimes... but not everytime..

[4integrity]

Today,for the first time, I heard someone say the ‘assaulters’....I thought....what..??? and then gave them the benefit of the doubt. WRONG! thought...maybe, they just couldn’t think of the correct word. I should have known better. I will keep tuned to this and if I hear this again, a call will go to the TV station or the WH and/or to Congresscritters. I agree...this word should not be used for our brave military who went face to face with the murderer of 3000 innocent people.

It never ends....

p.s. LOVE the Turbinator pic......LOL. W looks way cool!!

[Steel Wolf]

Today,for the first time, I heard someone say the ‘assaulters’....I thought....what..??? and then gave them the benefit of the doub

Assaulters is the correct term. The members of the assault team are the ones who breach and clear a building, as opposed to the security team that would hold the outer cordon.

I realize that without context it might sounds bad, but it's actually the terminology that SOF teams will use themselves, as part of recognized CQB doctrine. More colloquial terms would include 'door kicker' or 'trigger puller'. Assaulter is the formal word, but it's not a negative one by any means.

[sickoflibs]

RE “THEY HAVE FINALLY BLOWN IT! THEY ARE FOREVER MARKED AND ID’D HERE BY THEIR PERNICIOUS BABBLINGS. Remember their names for the future. I am. Enough is enough.”

OH-OH, he FINALLY caught us. Now he knows we think his hero Bush is a failure, our big secret. Where can we go now? We must run and hide shunned by the country.

When he says ‘ID’D HERE’ is that like caller ID? voter ID? Fingerprints? DNA? FoS?

[STARWISE]

And now you know why I stopped contributing to FReepathons.

~~~~~~~~~

Is that right.

I don’t get what one thing has to do with the other,
but you’re actually comfortable posting ugliness here AND you’re admitting to being a freeloader, too ?

I can’t imagine why you should be/deserve to be a FReeper.

[NordP]

Ah....thanks for the smile on my face after seeing that again!

[STARWISE]

;)