Thread: An Open Invitation to Bush Supporters

First, I would like to state the intended goal of this topic: To illicit, reasoned, persuasive feedback on the President and why you support him. This means: DO NOT: cite national security issues if you can not also make a reasoned and thorough argument for why, this means no going on ad nasuem with ambiguities of how if the Democratics had control it would be the Apocolypes, OK? Instead, tell me why exactly it would be the Apocolypes in your view.

Now, an introduction: I have always been a student of government and have worked in the legislative branch before drafting bills. However, my profession is law. Now, I have focused on two fields: International Trade Policy and Presidential Politics; obviously, this post pertains to the later. That being said, please note: the question that I will raise are from a scholars point of view and are politically neutral. In fact, I was an avid supporter of Bush in 2000.

And finally, the stimulus for conversation:

To whom it may concern,

How is it that there are those in this country that still support the administration?
I believe that it does not take a democratic or a republican to make a country work, the policies that they advocate are inconsequential as well.

If we look back at history, it did not matter whether the policies were liberal or conservative, what counted was that they were implemented effectively. You can look at Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, and Lyndon Johnson. What made these men great was that they were able to achieve their goals whatever they were(although Johnson has forever been tarnished by Vietnam.)

The administration has failed so miserably at everything they have set out to do. Beyond the security measures, which can not be attributed to Bush, but to the events of 9/11 and the public response, this president has been able to achieve non of his goals, even with the backing of congress. Even the measure that he has passed has been a disaster because the executive branch has failed to administer it properly (ie, no child left behind).

In fact, the President, who's party controls both houses of Congress, has been reduced to a lame duck, and a semi political pariah (many in his party are seeking to distance themselves from him for this election season).

Surely, he must lead, it is no good for anyone if he can not lead. This is regardless of whether one agrees with him or not.

For example, you can debate the War in Iraq all you want, but it was the administration's startegy to go in and so we went. However, it is now clear that we were not prepared adequately for going there, the President has failed to negotiate the situation with any degree of success.

Furthermore, I made the prediction shortly before the Invasion of Iraq, that if Bush was to win a second term, that there would be a party re-alignment to the Democrats. Well, we are only half way through that second term and it is already so bad that Republicans are in deep trouble, there is a real sense the Demcrats will take control of Congress and this is without a very organized Democratic party. Bush has destroyed his party through incompetence and wispers of corruption at every corner.

Furthermore, he has hurt the country badly in three major ways:

1) He has radicalized his base to a point of being far right. In truth, the Democrats have had to come to the political center to compete.

This is not good, it polarizes the country and makes everything into a partisan battle.

2) He has expanded executive power by alarming degrees.

Likewise, there was a separation of powers for a reason.

3) He has painted an extremely inaccurate portrait of the World outside the US.

To think about: Do you really think that the terrorist are just 'evil doers', do you really think that they hate freedom?

I agree Al Qaeda is a very real threat, but what was happening in Iraq and what is happening in Palestine/Israel/Lebanon is different. Hezbollah/Iran/Syria/Palestine are not terrorist. They have very justifiable and real reasons for what they do, in fact, they are often fighting for their own freedom and liberty.

I may ask you to look at Bush in this light: He is what Reagan would have been if he failed to lead and implement his policies.

Vento, do you have any friends you could convince to join these forums, as well? We need more people as informed as you.

Here's your chance AGAIN ilikeGW. I never could get her to give me the reasons she likes GW. I'm guessing, like most sheople, it's a team thing or family influence. ~Inkster

Regardless what I say, it'll be shot down. Quit baiting me and get over it already. A woman has to keep somethings a mystery.

I belong to another forum where I can express my views without name calling and stupid remarks and that's where I choose to state my feelings on my President. Maybe if you could ever find that place, you'd know why I support GW.

Please, ilikeGW, I would really like to hear a defense of the president. I was not being sarcastic. I know there are two sides to every story, and I would like to get the reasonable story from the other side.

Remember, this isn't about politics, this is about being an effective executive and party leader.

Something I can say for him, is he has a sense of humor. Or at least his wife does. How many first ladies would go on television and share to the nation that the president gave a farm-animal a handjob?

Well, we are only half way through that second term and it is already so bad that Republicans are in deep trouble, there is a real sense the Demcrats will take control of Congress and this is without a very organized Democratic party. Bush has destroyed his party through incompetence and wispers of corruption at every corner.

Deep trouble? The democrats are a party without any ideas. They have no message, and moreover, they have no messenger!

1) He has radicalized his base to a point of being far right. In truth, the Democrats have had to come to the political center to compete. This is not good, it polarizes the country and makes everything into a partisan battle.

This is good! When you have 1 party that wants to stay and fight the good fight against the radical muslim facist vs. the other party that just wants to cut and run from the battle, yea it's gonna turn into a partisan battle!!

I have always been a student of government and have worked in the legislative branch before drafting bills.

2) He has expanded executive power by alarming degrees. Likewise, there was a separation of powers for a reason.

Student? Alarming? Perhaps you should go back to school and take up American history? Have you lost "habeas corpus" due to a Abraham Lincoln? Have you been rounded up (Japanese Americans) and thrown into camps due to an FDR? Have you had your newspapers censored on the orders of a Woodrow Wilson? These are just some of the examples of what "great" presidents will do to help protect america during wartime.

3) He has painted an extremely inaccurate portrait of the World outside the US. I agree Al Qaeda is a very real threat, but what was happening in Iraq and what is happening in Palestine/Israel/Lebanon is different. Hezbollah/Iran/Syria/Palestine are not terrorist. They have very justifiable and real reasons for what they do, in fact, they are often fighting for their own freedom and liberty.

I hope you aren't just some blog troll and can account for your statement that hezbollah and the governments that support them aren't terrorist, seeing that Israel left Lebanon completely 6 years ago! So why the kidnapping and rocket attacks? Also, before the eyes of the whole world, Israel left Gaza. Every Jew, every soldier, every military installation, every remnant of Israeli occupation was uprooted and taken away.

How do the Palestinians respond? What have they done with Gaza, the first Palestinian territory in history to be independent, something neither the Ottomans nor the British nor the Egyptians nor the Jordanians, all of whom ruled Palestinians before the Israelis, ever permitted? On the very day of Israel's final pullout, the Palestinians began firing rockets out of Gaza into Israeli towns on the other side of the border. And remember: those are attacks not on settlers but on civilians in Israel proper, the pre-1967 Israel that the international community recognizes as legitimately part of sovereign Israel, a member state of the U.N.

But according to you they are "freedom fighters" and their actions are "justifiable"

I may ask you to look at Bush in this light: He is what Reagan would have been if he failed to lead and implement his policies.

Perhaps another history lesson is in order. Reagan, who witnessed 241 marines butchered in their sleep by a hezbollah suicide bomber did what the democrats suggest we do: Cut and Run! There is no logic in that. We have seen first hand what cutting and running does in the face of our enemies: First World Trade Center bombing, USS Cole, and 9/11 ring a bell???

PJ, you're my new hero.

this president has been able to achieve non of his goals

Oh, it must have been a dream that Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. I really must wake up. :roll:

Here, let me pinch you. :lol: