What's So Great About President Bush?

I appreciated his swift action in Afghanistan in the aftermath of 9/11. It wasn't a popular stance to take in my neck of the woods, but I thought it was a good decision by the president.

I second the swift action and toppling of the Taliban in Afghanistan, it will be a difficult stuggle but I believe true freedom is spreading there and has a solid chance of taking hold giving the U.S. an important ally against Al-Queda in the Middle East.

I'll also add in the fact that I don't think anyone could have done a better job than G.W. Bush at rallying the world in response to 9-11 and successfully gathering the support of over 120 countries and international organizations to condemn terrorism and stand with the United States pursuit of the terrorists who attacked the Twin Towers, Pentagon and tried to attack the White House. At that time hands were held across the globe to mourn the senseless loss of life caused by bin Laden and at that moment everyone was brought together as one. I'll never forget.

On a more serious note, whatever Bush has done right is severely outshadowed by what he has done wrong. I mean, nearly everybody some good qualities, but we're looking for a balance.

But I suppose Bush does mean well, just like the guy who hits his best friend in the face with a baseball bat because he has a fly sitting on his nose.

Bush has one thing going for him he has the ability to surround himself with clever people and one Carl Rove I believe was the reason he won the election. Rove researched the 2000 election and found the 2 areas of people which were missing from the Republican vote Christians and Evangelists. Bush was then able to target those 2 areas thus winning the election by a wider margin than 2000

First off, let me say that I am apolitical.
I do not support or oppose Bush.

Bush demonstrated that the large political entity known as the United States was still capable of defending itself, even when faced with cleverly devised sub-national attacks. (Attacks too small, and diffuse to be identified with a particular nation-state).

The test of civilization, from here on out, will hinge as much on sub-national aggression and intimidation, as it once did on defending against Hitler-type aggressive blitzkrieg and/or cold war type nuclear missile threat.

Those political entities unable to muster the will to shake off obsolete political correctness shackles, and respond effectively to internal gangism, religio-ethnic intimidation, and the manipulation of humanist laws as shields for jihad, will disappear, and be eaten alive by the human wave of people escaping the middle east.

Bush, (or his entourage), have not been shaken, intimidated, or fooled by the cynical tidal wave of mock constitutionalism, mock humanism, mock Saturday-night-liveism, and have done their job of holding back the lilliputian midgets who would burn our buildings, and murder us in our own streets.

Should they succeed, the coming hell of gangism that was headed our way, will never materialize,
and so they will never be given credit.

That does not matter, they know that.

This is what distinguishes true leaders, and true American Patriots.

I don't know if it is worth the effort, but here is something directly related to the question being asked (instead of the many rants going on).

I am a member of the military and have been for 18 years.

What I have seen President Bush do well is to reinvigorate and respect the military. We suffered for 8 years under a president who openly disregarded us (if you are not or were not in the military, you cannot dispute this as you have no personal knowledge on the subject). Under Bush, we received better funding and acknowledgement even before 9/11.

On the military front, I will not argue that Rumsfeld is far from a great SecDef and he is the one flaw in President Bush's interaction with the military.

I'm kind of tired of being told that I can only see one side of the Bush issue, so I'm going to chime in here.

I think Bush has done an excellent job of demonstrating that not all of Clinton's "Peace Dividend" was a good idea. While I'm not generally someone you'd classify as being in favor of the Iraq war, the fact that we might need to split our military several ways and the fact that Clinton left it largely incapable of this is something that needed attention. Bush has begun a revitalization of the military to allow for a more flexible force that makes better use of force multipliers. I like that.

I think Bush, while politically divisive, has returned a sort of Jeffersonian Informality to the White House. The president is a servant of the American People and Bush had successfully created an image of the President as an every-man. He is the sort of man you'd want to watch Monday Night Football with or take out for a burger. He's approachable, and that's a valuable quality in a leader.

Much as I'd like to credit Bush with the post 9-11 unity, I think that's more a symptom of the times than a symptom of the President. America sticks together in hard times, and I think I'd be detracting from the honor and dignity of my countrymen if I credited Bush with that accomplishment. Even so, Bush did successfully channel that unity into Afghanistan - which while controversial, unquestionably made the world a better place.

Regardless of my views on how Bush got us into Iraq, I think the seizure of the Iraqi oil fields and the consequential reinforcement of the Petro-Dollar has served to strengthen American economic influence and secure it for the foreseeable future. Spending is running towards the red line, but the assurance that the rest of the world still has to buy dollars to buy oil means that the dollar itself is safe for the long term.

Bush isn't all bad - he's done some things that even Leftists like myself think are good. Seeing both sides of any issue is important.

Brad I think you should delete all the offtopic posts here. I'm sure we've all seen a dozen columns where Phaedrus72 and Mykola go back and forth, or where Phaedrus posts the lyrics to heavy metal songs. That's not what this thread you started is for.

Here's one thing that Bush has done very right - he is aggressively trying to push through a guest worker program in a Congress where all the representatives are too scared to even talk about it. He's spot on with that program in my book.

I think that what a lot of socially conservative Christians like about Bush is that he is open about his faith. I heard an NPR report a few weeks ago about his support among conservative Christians and it seemed, anecdotally, to matter. Several people said that they knew he was trying and that he prayed for guidance and so they could forgive him if things didn't work out.

I'll bite - on the assumption this was an honest question (despite the condescending "why do you think he's 'great'" formulation). I support him over either of the prior alternatives because:

(1) He's approved agressive intelligence efforts that have almost certainly uncovered and prevented additional terrorist attacks in the US.

(2) That, combined with other actions, have prevented any terror attacks in the US going on 5 years [knock on wood].

(3) He has been a man of his word as far as international relations are concerned. He said he would not allow Saddam to continue thwarting international efforts and he followed through - even when the UN (read France and Russia) wouldn't support the efforts.

(4) He supported the creation (and lent diplomatic weight) to the Proliferation Security Initiative. That program brought together numerous countries to interdict nuclear and other WMD shipments. It was as a result of that program that we found out about the Pakistani scientist who was supplying numerous regimes with nuclear weapon materials. And because of that, we have set back numerous efforts by bad countries to develop nuclear weapons.

(5) He supports the only (IMO) long term solution to the problem of radical jihadist islam - reform the islamic world.

(6) At least partly as a result of 3-5, massive changes for the better have occured in the Middle East. There have been elections in Lebanon - after US pressure (and other factors) forced the Syrians out. Many of the Gulf states have held true elections and are liberalizing their societies. Egypt held its most free (but hardly free) election. Libya has wholly abandoned its WMD program (and admitted it was because of fear of ending up like Saddam). And in the heart of the Middle East, there is an incredible effort to establish a representative society. And that effort has so far proven resilant enough to perserve through even the most extreme trials - such as the Golden Mosque bombing.

(7) He has resisted the temptations of backtracking and "stayed" the course in Afghanistan and Iraq. Despite tactical changes, he has resisted the calls for immediate withdrawal. IMO, such a course would be exceedingly harmful to the US. The best example of this trait was related in Woodward's book about Afghanistan. A few weeks after the start of the war, the criticism was intense about lack of progress and the onset of the "Brutal Afghan Winter." A number of advisors were questioning whether the plan whould be changed. Bush cut them all short and reminded them that they had all agreed to the plan and that patience was needed. A few weeks later Kabul fell and the Taliban was driven from power.

(8) And on the domestic front...he pushed through tax cuts that I believe were both fair and also helped pull the country out of recession, while ultimately helping to fuel the current impressive economic expansion. I just wish that had been combined with spending cuts. :(

Anyway, that's off the top of my head.

As a moderate, I'm glad to see some of the more intelligent members of this forum commenting and getting this thing back on track. Reading it earlier, I had planned to make a post expressing annoyance at the seeming inability of any thread to go by as originally planned. "Name good things about Bush." "No, but here's some bad ones." Thank goodness some of the more intelligent (by which I mean less anger-filled) leftists like Killfile chimed in.

As for good things the man has done, I would name one more thing besides those already stated: I would say I admire that he's a man of conviction. My major problem with the state of current politics is that Presidents, Congresspersons and so on manage everything from their campaigns to their tenure by the polls. Most Presidents in the past, ones that I have liked and disliked from both parties, have made decisions by what is popular and carefully phrased speeches so as to not step on toes. I don't subscribe to the belief that the majority of people are always right. I've been waiting for a President to be his own moral compass and make decisions based on what he thinks is right (as JFK, one of our most popular Democratic presidents, advocated in one of his books). I've been hoping for this with full knowledge that when it happened, I would not agree with each decision he made. It came true, and I'm pleased for it on principle.

I heard a story about Bush's support among (I think) rural people on the radio a few days back. I wasn't really paying attention until this bit caught my ear. One woman conceeded that Bush had made mistakes and is perhaps not doing such a good job, but she still supported him because he "shared her values".

I don't know how widespread this sort of thinking is, but I find it chilling that people hold "shared values" in higher regard than basic competency.

Found it.

It was a story about social conservatives in a farming community in Florida. Listen.

Hmmm, let's see....

1. Economy - The economy is in a upswing after a deep fall after 9/11. Now, no President has that much control over what happens with the economy, it's more in the hands of the Federal Reserve Chairman, but we gave Clinton credit for the economic upswing.
2. Iran - This is an issue that needs to be taken seriously and I think the Bush administration is making its stance very clear.

To those that think that Bush is the single entity behind the invasion of privacy issues, you need to open your eyes. There are so many things happening in the background that you do not even see.

Does no one realize that had Clinton taken the action that he was suggested by the CIA and the NSA we may never had to invade Afghanistan. Had he been pro-active and pursued Osama bin-Laden when he was easy to track we may not be where we are today.

Spryndle,

Pre-9/11 Bush had pushed through the tax cuts along with the education reform package. Especially given the closeness of his election victory, he was pretty successful in enacting his legislative agenda.

And the point of the Life of Brian sketch was that the terrorists were idiots - the Romans did a hell of a lot. Ie, probably not the best example for your position. :)

I didn't vote for Bush and I don't agree with his policies and some of the actions he has taken. I'm not sure I'd "watch Monday Night Football" with him or "take him out for a burger" but then again I don't know him personally.

I think one of the good things about him, as others have stated, is that he sticks to his convictions. As a result, he's indirectly fostering a lot of debate about the direction of our country and the role we should play in the rest of the world. In short, he's making a lot of people think. Clinton really didn't have that effect until we all found out he lying about boning fat chicks. And then the debate was whether or not a blowjob is considered sex.

We hold very highly the idea that not only are we entitled to our opinions, but that we should have opinions in the first place. Bush's actions are forcing us all to consider the implications of our actions throughout the world, to think about how close religion should be to politics, and whether or not we should let the actions of one man or administration speak for an entire population.

And yet Sprydle just keeps talking...

Anyway, to Megido, I would call "no child left behind" a mixed success. Bush didn't really create it (it was started by Bush Sr., reformed by Clinton, and then implemented by Bush). It carries a lot of risks, but simultaneously creates standards. The act doesn't really remove any standards, quite the opposite. It put unrealistic ones in place. Talking to teachers (as I often do, with a fiance, mother, and brother all being in that line of work), they aren't concerned about lowered standards. They're concerned about the ability of schools to actually meet these new standards, as the act essentially says "if you don't improve test scores, your school gets shut down." This puts stress on teachers and administration to cheat, and too much emphasis on scores instead of cognitive learning.

On the positive side, inner-city schools (which it was written to help in the first place) now have standards imposed by federal regulations, rather than whatever state and local governments decide is "good enough." Teachers were asking, for years, for inner-city school standards, and now they've been given with a sweeping change that affects all schools (because, quite honestly, the outcry would be ridiculous if it only applied to "trouble schools" which typically have a mostly minority population). It's flawed, it needs reform, but in concept it is not a mistake, and is precisely what educators have been wanting for years. So like I said, mixed success.

he took responcibility for fed respnce to katrina.
he sticks to his word and promises.
he reached out to dems in no child left behind
he is best pres since ford for comedians
and not for me but alot will agree, he has done
more than any other president helping out the religous right
and he gave me that 300$ check a few years back

I'll throw something in:

He strikes me as a man of principles.

I don't think I'd want to hang out with him, and I know we don't see eye to eye on a great number of issues...but I admire that he seemingly has a strong set of beliefs, and will not waver from those.

Perhaps it's a bit of stubbornness, but I admire that he doesn't seem to use the polls to determine how he feels about things.

Granted, I wouldn't pick him for the job if I had it to do over again, as there's just too much I don't agree with him on...but I do respect the fact that he doesn't seem to back down on issues he feels strongly about.

I guess this proved the lack of restraint Bush-Bashers have. The original post was noble enough in its query.
"What do supporters really think is great about President Bush?"

Additionally to what's been mentioned, I will have to add some good things I personally associate with him.

Compassionate about his beliefs.

He has access to the best intelligence info on the planet and I believe he is doing what he thinks is correct.

Put the military back in military… and with few exceptions, they seem to love him.

Free elections in the Middle East. Scared Libya.

Counters his on party on immigration issues, knows it's not such a black and white issue. Speaks Spanish.

Can fly a jet.

No sex scandal in the White House.

Pulled us out of a recession with the tax cuts and government spending (gets bashed by his own party for the heavy spending)

Help promote and support charity groups as active supporters of their community through faith based initiatives. i.e., Lets get out and help our own communities.

Done more for minority representation in positions of power than any president.

On jogs, he is much harder for his secret service detail to keep up with as opposed to President Clinton. Hurts his knee and now rides a mean mountain bike.

Has a very supportive but independent wife. She plays the part of First Lady very well.

Talk directly to the people.

Had to deal with slightly rebellious daughters while running the most powerful country on the planet.

Works on a ranch.

Threw a very respectable, maybe even impressive, first pitch in the World Series after 9/11 in NYC.

He can be very funny at times… especially when joking with the press.

He "get's it."

--

Almost every post has been countered with a negative one here. Regardless of what people think about him, you would think they could consider the possibility that these are very complex issues. What you read about for a few minutes in a newspaper... what you hear a professor promote in a classroom... is not the same as sitting at the helm and getting the real information, in real time, from people who's lives are dedicated to analyzing these issues.

He is the elected president of the country, if you disagree with the way the country is going, post your idea and support it with facts… and post it in the proper place. Blaming him bacause you made a mistake on your taxes is just silly. This thread is way off topic.

Bush cut taxes considerably and increased the caps on retirement accounts.

I believe his tax policy is largely responsible for the current prosperous economy
enjoyed by Americans.

On the other hand, I wish he would show more fiscal restraint with regard to
government spending.

I would also assert that *if* Bush's policies in the middle east cause democracy to
flourish in that region he will go down in history as one of our greatest leaders.

It will be interesting to see how history remembers the Bush administration.

Looks like you missed a few off-topic comments.