Who here likes Bush? For starters, me.
By Nick Haynes Comments (15) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Recently, one of those illustrious liberals posted a blog here asking who liked Bush. While the Redstate and conservative community have some issues with our President (and rightly so), let me tell you why I like, have stood by, and will continue to stand by our President.
1.) He's a man of steel.
While I don't always agree with him, you cannot count 'wishy-washy' in with his negatives. One of the things that infuriated me about President Clinton was his seeming necessity to refer to a poll before doing anything more politically dangerous than brushing his teeth. It goes back to the delegate vs. trustee argument: do the people want someone who asks them before making a decision, or do they vote for someone who they trust will make the right decision with the information available to them? I would contend that it is the responsibility of our elected officials to make the decisions, and our responsibility to elect the right people to make those crucial decisions. Bush doesn't back down from a controversial decision, nor should he. If the American people need to be consulted before every decision, there is no reason to elect people to positions of leadership.
2.) He is a foursquare proponent of life.
While I find it disheartening that Bush has only used one veto in a 6-year timeframe where there were plenty of places to use it, I am pleased that he used it to veto federal funding of embroyonic stem-cell research. The ethics surrounding this process are murky at best, and horrific at worst. Vetoing federal funding of a process that should be taken up by the private sector is one of the best moves he has made. Furthermore, while we don't necessarily know where Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Samuel Alito will stand in twenty years, all signs would point to the fact that they will send Roe v. Wade to the ash heap of history and send the question back to the states, where it belongs. Regardless of your position on abortion, Roe v. Wade is a constitutional abomination, and one that has no place where the judiciary should have made that decision.
3.) He is fighting the terrorists where they sleep instead of where we sleep.
9/11 was a tragedy never before seen by the world. What made it more appalling was that it could have been prevented if we had only used more foresight, and sucked it up despite the political consequences. George W. Bush has made it his defining mission in life to do his best to eradicate the world of Islamofacism, and all other forms of terror. There have surely been missteps in the war, but war is never perfect. Hindsight is always 20/20, but Bush is focused on the future so that we will never have to revist the past.
4.) I have more money in my pockets because of his 'tax cuts for the rich,' despite being in the lower part of the income bracket.
While my income is nobody's business, suffice it to say that, as a college student and part-time worker, I am not raking in money hand over fist. However, George W. Bush has pushed through tax cuts that ensure that I can do a little less scrimping, and a lot more saving. And, for those who would say that the rich have benefited the most from the tax cuts, it's kind of hard to argue when the top 50% of wageearners in this country pay over 96% of taxes received.
5.) When I was in the military, he made me proud once again to be a servicemember.
Serving under Clinton for one and one-half years, I can attest to the fact that the military was disheveled on his watch. Serving under President Bush, there was a 180 degree turnaround in how the military conducted their affairs. I wasn't always happy with my chain of command, but President Bush made me a little bit happier than I already was to put on the uniform of the United States Navy. He brought a sense of satisfaction and pride to the task that every servicemember faces of ensuring that our country remains safe, strong, and free. Twenty years from now, I will look back on my service with a great deal of pride, and I will count it as a privilege to not only have served our nation, but also as a sailor under George W. Bush.
The list could go on and on, but I have other tasks to accomplish. This is just a starting point for why I was happy to vote for him in 2000, even happier to vote for him in 2004, and why I have a great deal of pride in calling George W. Bush our President.
Let's just take your 'man of steel' comment.
1) Bush opposed the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, but then decided to adopt it as a position. It was a bad idea, many conservatives backed his opposition to. Then, he switched and left us hanging in the wind.
2) Bush opposed the creation of a the 9/11 commission, and then bowed to pressure and set it up. Again, conservatives recognizing the stupidity of this commission supported him in saying this was a bad idea. Again, we ended up twisting in the breeze when he reversed course.
3) President Bush was against McCain-Feingold, and then signed it.
4) Harriet Myers? Alito wasn't the first choice. Alito is what conservatives got after they forced Bush to back down. Bush is only 2/2 because conservatives went nuts, and Bush waffled. Thank God Bush isn't such a man-of-steel after all.
5) Bush has waffled on what to do with the new national intelligence czar. A position many conservatives don't even support.
6) The fiasco in New Orleans was not the administration's fault. Conservatives rushed in to support the president on this. Then the president went to New Orleans and promised unlimited funds to reconstruct the city.
As for Iraq - we are being treated to a daily dose of the President reviewing 'options' for a war we've been up to our necks in for years.
Get off the Internet and visit a real-life Republican gathering. President Bush is not popular with the base, and the above list is only a short indication as to why. No Child Left Behind, the Medicare fiasco, the steel tariffs, immigration, and a whole lot more could be added in.
Many rank-and-file Republicans are sick of this administration, and they have good reason to be.
President Bush is gone in two years. The party needs to focus on the future. For all intents and purposes, he is the past. Time to learn our lessons, and pick someone who actually will stick to principals on a broad range of fronts.
There are plenty of good Republicans to choose from who will stand up for principles, I only hope that we don't pick a RINO like McCain or Rudy.
Is Bush my "poster boy" President? Not hardly. Is he a conservative? Not hardly? Do I approve of or even like most of what he's done? Not even close.
Is he better than any of the alternatives? By a landslide. Gore? Heh. Kerry? Arrrggghhh. McCain in 2000? Any day.
You say, There are plenty of good Republicans to choose from who will stand up for principles... Who? And what principles?
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
I thought the context made it clear, but my classification of Bush as a man of steel means that he is a man of principles, which he doesn't back down from.
I completely agree that Bush has numerous downsides. Everyone does. Even Reagan has his downsides, as articulated by California Conservative when he pointed out Reagan's lack of response to the Marine barracks bombing, and the appointment of two SCOTUS justices that turned out to be activists in originalists clothing.
I will be the first to say that I wish we had someone else stand up in 2000 besides Bush, McCain, and Buchanan. Sometimes, though, that is the way the ball bounces.
Now, if he was a complete shame, I wouldn't stand up for him. But, he has his strong suits, and I refuse to leave the President behind simply because it would be the popular thing to do.
We do have to look forward, but we can't forget the present completely. Rally around the President, scold him when need be, but rehabilitate him and get him strong going into 2008. Otherwise, we will fall completely from power.
Don't be afraid to see what you see.-Ronald Reagan
For more common sense conservatism, visit the Show Me Conservatism blog.
We've had a couple of posts today from people who don't have any intention of starting any kind of productive dialogue; just some people trying to provoke us. I'm glad that part of the effect of that is that we are forcing ourselves to defend President Bush, and are stopping to remember and post the positive things he has done.
I have the sense post-election that the number of positive comments/posts about the President here have declined. That may or may not be justified, but I understand the frustration.
I think that many of us here are waiting for the next President Reagan, and I guess we'll keep waiting, but for the meantime, I'll enjoy these unintended consequences. President Bush will be at least the 2nd best President of my lifetime to date.
A couple more reasons to like President Bush: 1) President Bush doesn't have to take a poll to know which way the wind blows. 2) We don't have to worry about President Bush hiring the wind as an intern... :)
All of your points are well put.
Number two especially. Bush is pro-life. He hasn't waivered from his position on this issue, and while the War in Iraq dominates the agenda, pro-life issues ought not be forgotten.
Related to being pro-life, one of Bush's best achievments will be his picks to the court, Roberts, Alito, (and if old man Stevens retires) Brown/Wilkinson.
develops a serum to counter the psychopathic rage that often accompanies even moderate cases of Bush Derangement Syndrome,™ liberals will finally be able to look back at the turn of the 21rst Century, reflect, ponder, and then ask themselves: "Why weren't we thinking?"
That said...
Depending upon the disposition of Iran's nuclear weapons program when he leaves office, President Bush will place 5th or 6th on my all-time list.
***
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
If I had enough free time to write a book it would be titled "W versus Reagan: Who's the True Conservative Warrior?"
I have to point out that Reagan, my childhood hero, used two of his three Supreme Court picks to put moderates on the Court.
W is 2 for 2 on the Supreme Court.
Reagan looked the other way when U.S. Marines were killed in Beirut and when airlines were hijacked.
W did what both Reagan and Clinton were afraid to do: he engaged the Muslims on their own turf rather than waiting for the next terrorist attack as both Reagan and Clinton did.
A gi-normous realignment in world relations has occurred under GWB. No longer is the world divided into pro-red and anti-red alliances. The new paradigm is industrialized nations (both non-Muslim and Muslim) and other non-Muslim nations against terrorist groups and the nations that support them (and throw North Korea into that latter group, just for good measure).
This realignment will definitely improve not only American security but world security as well. Throughout history, the most dangerous times are when two or more bona fide super-powers exist and it is unclear which super-power holds more clout. This situation existed before WWI (over 10 million killed) and WWII (over 20 million killed).
Since the 9/11-related realignment, death and chaos have generally been contained in parts of the world like Iraq and Afghanistan. Compared to the death and destruction seen in the two previous world wars, this one has been virtually bloodless for the industrialized world.
I know that this is not a PC thing to say, but it's true.
We have Bush to thank for this. He didn't beg NATO to respond for us. He didn't ask the UN to create a 21st Century international fighting force, as a liberal president like Gore might have done.
He recognized that we have the power to fight terrorism by leading other nations to the fight rather than begging for consensus.
Don't get me wrong. Bush is a conservative through and through. He just has a different brand of conservatism than Reagan's. With regards to his SCOTUS picks, Sandra Day O'Conner was thought to be a good jurist at the time, and Anthony Kennedy was the result of a Bork-Ginsberg failure and a Senate bound by a 'duty' to obstruct. Remember, while we have all the signals now, I also pointed out that we don't know how Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Alito will turn out twenty years from now.
As far as the Marine barracks goes, we now have hindsight. Remember, with Reagan, that was the first real attack by jihadists on American interests. That is not to give carte blanche to Reagan, but Bush had numerous terror attacks to back up the fact that we needed to eradicate it once and for all.
Reagan also was an economic conservative, whereas George Bush seems to be a little bit more liberal in that regards.
Both are conservatives in their own right, and we don't need to discuss who is more so. They are their own men, and both have made tremendous gains for our movement.
Don't be afraid to see what you see.-Ronald Reagan
For more common sense conservatism, visit the Show Me Conservatism blog.
He's a guy's guy. He's real. He likes to tell off-color jokes, even gets risque sometimes, like that incident in Africa a few years back where him and Laura witnessed two elephants humping at a distinguished National Park visit.
And he's not nearly as religious conservative as the liberals make him about to be. He chose Pro-Choice Republican JoAnn Davidson as RNC Co-Chair and stood by her.
Plus, you get just a guy feeling that deep down George knows how to party and have a good time.
And let's all be honest. His wife is hot.
He was my Governor for 8 years. I had one opportunity to meet him, at a fundraiser at a private home in Corpus Christi serving for Cong. Ron Paul at the time.
He was very cordial and friendly in the 5 minutes we spent together shootin' the sh*t, Bush, the Congressman and I.
His policies? He's squishy. Better than most. But still a squishy moderate. But he's great on fighting the War on Terror.
Bush? I like the guy. He could be better. But he's my President.
Eric Dondero
www.mainstreamlibertarian.com
have voted for him in every election he has run in, and donate time and money to his causes.
I like him for many of the reasons listed here.
I cannot only talk about what I like.
I am very disappointed that he has led so poorly in fighting this war. He has chosen to lead too quietly. He has been distracted from the one goal that matters: winning.
He has not used his proven sales-ability to sell the war consistently at home.
He deserved more, but he needed to do more.
The good news is that this is far form over.
America can choose victory.
I don't always agree with him,but,I don't think we've ever had a more honest President. He's the real deal.
Some anti-bush sentiment? Some negative posts? Let's get a grip and call it like it is, the man has been vilified here at Redstate. Yes many have their reasons and they have oh so eloquently droned on about it to the point that I sorta, no, not sorta, was happy to find other places to visit on the internet with occasionally dropping in see if the "madness" had abated at all.
Redstate is generally a place of reasoned debate, it is unlike anywhere else I've found since I signed up for Prodigy in 1990! (heck I even spent a few years doing the BBS thing in the days preceding that)
But after the election it seemed that reason had failed and as predicted we all gathered round in a circle and started shooting away.
We can all agree that the elections were a disaster but any arguments to point out that GWB who certainly had the best information and the outlook on defeat worked right up until the last hours trying to rally the base.
It sure looked like everywhere he went huge crowds gathered to greet him. I've yet to see anyone post an "in-depth" report of his effect on voting patterns. Did he keep it close where it was going to be a blowout? Did he help tip the scales to help a few keep their seats that would have been lost otherwise.
What IS known though is that the results were not my idea of a good time. Lots of reasons for this folks, spending certainly caught up to a lot of pols. Their inability to enact legislation on border security. That whole Foley thing being a surprise.... With the latest news being that the dems were shopping that all over for months and nothing was done about it.
Then came Rumsfeld, boo hoo how could GWB throw him under the bus like that. Oh why didn't he do it before the election if he was going to do it, we might have held more seats, waa waa.
I thought it was huge that he didn't blink an eye, I'm sure he was counseled and begged to do it before the election but he didn't succumb to what was politically expedient and let the SECDEF be a victim of politics, instead he held his ground until after the election. I believe the word is Integrity.
One item not mentioned above is No Child Left Behind, hated by both sides. Cost on one side and accountability on the other. Yet after so many years of increased spending on education with the results being an ever increasing gap between cost and accomplishment we finally have a yard stick to measure with. What greater investment is there than education in a society? All of the stats tell us that we need a better educated workforce and here came a man with a vision who withstood the attacks from both sides of the isle to do the right thing, or at least his perception of it. I'm sure every poll said it would make him unpopular with huge groups of people yes he did what he thought was right.
Same deal with Social Security, how long had it been since anyone even had the nerve to raise that discussion? It didn't get very far but he still made an effort to do the right thing.
9/11, hurricanes, natural disasters, no president has ever dealt with so much. While he may not be out in front of the American people, as much as I would like, talking to us, it is reassuring to know he is "the decider".
I loved Ronald Reagan, for me I didn't think there could ever be a president again in modern history who could have so much impact on the world. Yet, "the decider", for me, has moved Uncle Ron back to the number two spot as America's greatest leader of modern times.
It's my opinion and I'm sticking with it, cus I'm a "decider" too.
Well done is better than well said. —Benjamin Franklin
differently. But he didn't and that is now looking back! There's no point in looking bakc other than to learn from mistakes and not make them again.
for the most part, I still support the President. God help us if the Donks gain control of the White House in '08, because it is a sure thing that our war efforts will be set back decades!
I have never been a fan of this President, but I really enjoy reading history. I would not even begin to try and predict how this will turn out. Maybe standing firm right now and fighting the war in Iraq will be the right decision. I think we now realize that trying to establish democracy in that part of the world is years if not decades in the future. Just making sure that America comes out okay is not a bad philosophy. Will hi-tech save the military or will we need to recognize the need for more troops on the ground? Once again, hard to say. The real question to me is whether or not we are able to present an alternative to the philosophy of anger that seems to be so much a part of the middle east. As I see it, the Sunni population is the group willing to blow things up and they are supported by most of the middle east. The shia are bloody, but they do not have the numbers. As an ex-marine, I have tried to keep an open mind to both sides of this situation. We have some of the most courageous men and women in the world over there, I am concerned about the fact that they are deploying them so often and that according to the military, we are stretching the army and marines to the limit. As I said, history will decide.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?