Nevertheless, I will proudly and gladly vote for him this November, and also plan to volunteer at my local Republican HQ to work hard for his re-election. I happen to like much, though not all of his domestic agenda. I also happen to be very proud of his genuinely conservative foreign policy.
But overriding everything else, George W. Bush almost single-handedly held this nation together in those terrible days immediately after 9/11/01. His pursuit of our enemies since then has taken guts, resolve, and far-sighted thinking. That obviously doesn't count for squat with many self-professed "real" conservatives. As for me, his towering, comforting presence and defiant spirit during that time has more than earned my loyalty, my life-long respect and my support.
Some good — and many terrible — arguments have been posted on this forum recently about this issue. I think everyone, by now, gets the point of folks like you, AmericanInTokyo. To keep nagging and yammering here on FR is a waste of time for those "real" conservatives who feel so strongly about the issue. Instead, you all should nag and yammer at your congress-critters — you know, those folks who actually will make the decision as to whether or not the proposal becomes law?!
On the other hand, if your real purpose is simply to disrespect the President, I say bring it on, bub. This President's record is one not only to be proud of, but already is one for the ages.
As regards the guest-worker proposal, the last laugh will be on you. Why? As a substantive issue, the Bush proposal is a shadow, a chimera. The likelihood that Congress will pass any immigration reform legislation for the foreseeable future is somewhere between slim and none. The Dems hate the proposal because it isn't a complete, blanket amnesty. It doesn't go anywhere near far enough for them. Many Republicans dislike it for some of the very same reasons stated on this forum. Ipso facto, gridlock on the issue in Congress.
By the way, don't set doctrinaire law here on FreeRepublic if some of us like to indulge in BOTH yammering on FR about this issue, as well as peppering the backsides of our representatives on the issue through treatise. Which is what I do, for your information.
See, the point isn't whether Bush's immigration proposal is half-baked. Many of us would agree with that. The issue is whether those who think it's half-baked are able to see the bigger issues in this election, and will vote to re-elect Bush for the things he's done right -- like his response to the 9/11 attacks, his refusal to surrender the sovereignty of the US to the "international community," the character and nature of his judicial appointments, his tax-cutting policies, his effort to bring faith back into the forefront of our culture, and so forth. When I read incessant threads where the only thing people are concerned about is immigration policy, do you understand why I think those who spew their poison toward Bush on such threads are dangerously narrow in their viewpoints? For those who are unable to see the bigger issues, and are consumed by the single issues, if it means they will put this nation in jeopardy because of their passion for the single issue, they are no better than the liberal Democrats.