Replies

You've been kinda schizophrenic on this topic, DO.

But you've revealed enough in some of your posts to let us know that deep down you DO admire the character and courage of George W. Bush.

You can continue your bluster all you want now, but some where deep inside, you know President Bush is a man of immense character whose politics just don't line up with yours.

He's not the bad guy you've built an internet reputation on ripping to shreds, and you know it. I would recommend that you stand on your own more often and don't worry about impressing the haters around here.

They're definitely not worth it, and there are only a handful left who still don't get it.

(btw, the talking point that Bush gave us Obama is just plain silly. You know enough historical fact to stop throwing that inanity around).

The entire boy band has now arrived. Must have stopped practicing their grunge rock in mommy's basement to hit the I-hate-Bush-and-that-makes-me-cool high school gymnasium concert circuit.

You've been kinda schizophrenic on this topic, DO.

Yes, I do come off that way to a certain extent. I do try to give Bush his due. People are complex. They're not one dimensional, I'll grant you that.

So yes, there are some things I appreciate about him. There are other things that disturb me greatly about him.

He had some great instincts. On the other hand he had some terrible instincts.

If you're one of us, do you double the budget of the Department of Education in your first term, knowing what we know about it?

If you're one of us, do you honor your oath of office related to Article IV Section IV?

If you're one of us, do you push through a massive new Great Society spending plan that will sap our nation for generations?

If you're one of us, do you put the onus for security checks on your own citizens, or do you limit entry into this nation of people from problematic nations?

If you're one of us and 19 Saudi Nationals who entered our nation on student visas takes out around 3,000 lives, and trillions of our infrastructure, do you sign on to have upwards of 30,000 Saudi nationals on our soil at any given time?

If you're one of us, do you trash Israel for responding to terrorists shooting missiles into it's frontier?

If you're one of us, do you remain silent for the most part as the Left destroys you?

There were times when a Conservative's gutt response would have served Bush well, but he took the opposite position. I'm not saying this to be mean or destructive, but folks if we can't be honest between ourselves, what good is this forum?

What possible benefit would I be reaping as a Conservative, to take a guy to task unfarly? I value my credibility with folks who see fault with Bush. Sure, if we're being honest, I do. I also value my credibility with folks who support Bush, when he's done something I can back.

And there you have it. I give him credit when I can, and I really let him have it when I can't. Folks, some of you backed the guy no matter what he was doing. There was never a time when we could be honest about him, and that is most clearly exemplified by the fact that you're good naturedly taking me to task even years after he has left office. What need is there for me to point out the good things he has done. You folks smoked the forum with non-stop praise for over a decade. It was up to me and other folks to try to be honest as we could be about what we saw wrong with him. If there hadn't been the non-stop praise, I would have spent more time praising him.

But you've revealed enough in some of your posts to let us know that deep down you DO admire the character and courage of George W. Bush.

Yes, I do. He is five times the man Obama is. None the less, the educational part of Bush's responsibilities did not take place. He simply didn't have it in him to champion Conservatism. Number one, Bush in the Conventional sense of the term, was not a Conservative. He wasn't fiscally. He wasn't even a lock socially. On some matters he was. On others he wasn't. The one area where he came off reasoned more often than not, was the military.

You can continue your bluster all you want now, but some where deep inside, you know President Bush is a man of immense character whose politics just don't line up with yours.

Okay, I will admit to thinking that Bush did have some decent character traits. At the same time, I cannot state that he had immense charcter. You can't stand by and watch our nation over-run, or watch our Department of Education indoctrinate our kids on a myriad of absoutely terrible topics, and be considered by me to have immense character. The two are mutually incompatible. Where this begins to be a problem, is when his politics don't line up with mine. Yes, true. Nobody is going to agree with me all the time. None the less, when it comes to sovereignty issues, I get pretty darned testy. When it comes to potential terrorists on our soil, I get pretty darned testy. When Islamic acherents stand up on planes and play silly games, I expect our Justice Department to go postal. When they don't, I'm going to get pretty darned testy. When regions of our nation are turned into Tijuana in a matter of years, because foreign nationals are simply occupying MY homeland, I get pretty darned testy. When a foreign nation is attacked with missles, I expect them to take corrective measures. Why my president carps about it, I get pretty darned testy. When a department of the government that has been trying to brainwash our kids on morals, homsexuality, and the issues related to the importance of the United States positive impact on the world get their funding doubled, I'm not going to just get pretty darned testy, I'm going to go postal in place over it.

What bothers me, is that people who claim to be Conservative think this is ever so unfair. No, it isn't unfair.

He's not the bad guy you've built an internet reputation on ripping to shreds, and you know it. I would recommend that you stand on your own more often and don't worry about impressing the haters around here.

First of all, my reputation on the internet is the very last thing I think about when I deal with people here. While I do try to be reasoned so both sides know they can converse with me, I tell it like I see it and let the chips fall where they will. I have had my comments quoted on other forums for good and bad reasons. I generally balance out my comments rather extensively. If anything, my posts are longer than other people's, and I try to place them right next to the comments I'm addressing for clairty's sake. I don't want people getting the wrong impression, but people are going to game my comments if they can and there isn't anything I can do about it. I don't go to Leftist forums to participate, or even read. If someone wants to know what I think, they'll have to come here and look around. If they want to, they'll be able to see why I say what I do, and believe as I do.

The idea that I have built an internet reputation for ripping George Bush to shreds is ludacrust. More often than not, I avoid Bush and Palin threads. Two visions of either of these people are impossible to stand side by side here. It gets ugly, and I'm just not into playing that game 24/7/365. Once in a while I'll explain my thoughts on them, and move on. And most often when I do it, there are very strong supportive comments on the thread already, and it's simply pointless for me to repeat what other have already said countless times.

If I happen across something said about Bush or Palin that I think is unfair, I jump in to defend them without hesitation. If I were trying to build a reputation ripping either of them to shreds, I would never do that and you know it.

They're definitely not worth it, and there are only a handful left who still don't get it.

Look, there are plenty of people here who do not get it. I'm not going to sit still for someone coming here and saying untrue negative things about Bush or Palin. What you don't see is me talking to people behind the scenes, explaining why I see things a bit differently than they do. I'm not a shoe-in to trash Bush or Palin by any means. On the other hand, I have found it absolutely impossible to reason with either Bush or Palin die-hard supporters. Literally everthing is explained away. It's just a waste of time to do it. I spend probably 2% of my time addressing them, and 98% of my time behind the scenes talking to folks who see problems with them, in ways intended to moderate views. Moderating both sides should be my goal shouldn't it. Nobody is perfect. We should be able to address imperfections honestly. We simply can't.

Strangely the folks who do see problems with Bush or Palin don't get angry with me for saying reasoned things for or against Bush or Palin. Here, you have kindly taken me to task for daring to say negative things about Bush, even though I did say some nice things too by your account. That is not the same thing is it. I'm not saying that to be mean. You were nice to me. I'm simply trying to explain to you how some of us see it, who do see good and bad things concerning people you stridently support.

(btw, the talking point that Bush gave us Obama is just plain silly. You know enough historical fact to stop throwing that inanity around).

I want you to think long and hard about the two candidates in 2008, and tell me if you think Bush did a good enough job of communicating what sound U. S. policy should be during his eight years in office. You had McCain and you had Obama. Either way, WE WERE SCREWED. Obama wanted to destroy our global influence, put us in our place, increase the Islamic influence in the U.S. McCain wanted us to be a global partner, destroying our global influence, making us a part of the globalist socialist collective. We would have forgone the Muslim part, but other than that I actually believe he would have closed Gitmo and pulled us out of Iraq and Afghanistan before this. Republicans would have backed him.

Is it our president's job to use the bully pulpit to implement and defend Conservative policies and the U. S. Constitution? Of course it is. If done properly, you hand off the reins of power to a like minded invidual to carry on where you left off. Part of your job is to cultivate people to replace you, so continuity remains. When Bush left, he had all but destroyed his ability to do this.

McCain was even reticent to use him for campaign purposes. Of course McCain was about the worst candidate I've seen other than the elder Bush. The populace didn't want four more years of Republican rule even if that meant Obama would be voted in. Whose fault was that? If you think it was exclusively McCain's, I think you're being dishonest with yourself.

Look, you folks have every right to see Bush by whaterver light you want. The problem for you, is that the farther out you get to defend him, the farther from the main-stream you get. Eventually it beomes impossible for you to fathom that Bush is not seen by almost everyone, close to the same way you see him.

Bush killed us. Despite him doing some reasoned good things, his administration wound down under a very dark cloud. That's how too many people saw it. It cost McCain independent voters. And yes, McCain did too. He was a jackass. "You have nothing to fear from an Obama administration." Bush wasn't railing on Obama and what he would mean for the nation. McCain wasn't either.

Sarah was the only person defending the rhelm. She wasn't enough. If McCain or Bush had grown a spine in the last six months before the elction, I think we would have had a good chance. Niether did, and here we are.

The Democrats were making hay off the failed lending institutions framing it as the Republican's fault. They pinned the whole economic slide on Bush. Did Bush push back? No. They were out there railing on our party non-stop. Who countered their treachery? Who had the loudest voice to do it?

How on earth can you let things slide to the point that your own party will pick a guy as sordid as McCain to replace you? How can you possibly remain silent as the primaries go along and McCain gains and retains traction? Why did it not occur to Bush, that the worst possible electoral situation I've seen in my 40 adult years, was not acceptable? And yet, he watched that whole thing take place as quiet as a church mouse.

This wasn't just your natural change of power. This was a handing over of the reigns of our nation to a person who favored Islamic nations over the West. And then there was McCain too. Cringe. And yet, Bush couldn't muster the gumption to warn our party members against this train wreck.

Was it totally Bush's fault? No. Did Bush do anything at all to stop it, let alone put his full force behind stopping it? No.

I'm sorry, but it's my take than in large part, Bush is responsible for who replaced him. I understand your dismissal of that opinion. I'm not going to fault you for it. That's none the less how I see it.

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.