Do Me A Favor - Please Defend George W. Bush . . .

[Median Democrat]

On the Free Republic board against conservatives now trying to disown by saying that we are getting away from the principles of Reagan. My reaction is what? Even John McCain talks longingly about returning to the principles espoused by Ronald Reagan, and I am left to wonder how much different is Bush than Reagan. Indeed, I think that George W. Bush represents the natural evolution of Reagan's lower taxes, high deficits, and pro-military approach to government. Indeed, Bush actually carried out Reagan's vision by invading Iraq, rather than simply sending in troops into some place like Granada.

So, the question I would love to have conservatives answer is how is Bush different from Reagan? Put another way, what would have Reagan done differently? After all, unlike Reagan, Bush actually had a GOP dominated congress for most of his tenure. Aside from privitizing social security, Bush also pretty much got what he wanted policy wise. Thus, America's economy is in a ditch, and we are stuck in a war in Iraq. Of course, the GOP (most notably McCain) are now saying that we need to return to the principles of Reagan, thus implying that Reagan would have done things differently.

So, the mission should you choose to accept it, is to get some conservatives to explain what is the difference between Reagan and Bush, and is it fair to say that Bush has strayed from the vision espoused by Reagan. I would argue that if Reagan invaded Iraq, then Reagan would likely be regarded with the same disdain as Bush. Instead, Reagan invadaed Granada.

[babylonsister]

1. EWWWW! No can do. But someone might try to help you...and

how long have you been a member of Free Republic? :popcorn:

[Cleita]

2. Reagan was a bigger bullshitter than Bush because as an actor he

had to learn English. Bush obviously only has a passing acquaintance with it. Other than that, the same greys that are lurking behind the curtain giving Reagan his cues have been doing the same for the Bushes and I mean daddy and sonny.

[PBS Poll-435]

3. George Bush is an EXCELLENT Kisser

As far as I know...

[texanwitch]

16. Well, looks like he can french kiss pretty good.

Looks like he is enjoying the kiss to.

[lonestarnot]

4. You just have at all that. Peeee UUUUU!

Ackety.

[Kutjara]

5. The major difference between Reagan and Bush...

...is that Reagan's dementia didn't really take hold until he left office, whereas Bush has had it since birth.

[BlooInBloo]

6. Sounds like you have a lot invested over there.

[Median Democrat]

15. This is my point - Bush Proves That Conservatism Is A Failure

The RW, of course, does not want to admit this. Yet, they understand that it is difficult to defend Bush's records even though he has had free reign to impose a right wing mandate with a GOP controlled congress for most of his tenure.

So, what does the right wing do? They invoke the name of Reagan without explanation, as though if Reagan implemented these same policies, things would be different. Indeed, McCain tries to say he is doing something different than Bush by invoking the name of Reagan. However, my point is, so what?

What exactly would Reagan have done differently? I am not a member of Free Republic, and there is lemming like statement that McCain wants to be like Reagan, as though this represents a dramatic change from Bush. I know some folks on this board have Freeper accounts. I don't. So, my request is pose the question to these freepers. What exactly is the difference between Reagan and Bush that they are so fond of.

So, if someone knows a freeper, pose the question to them. What is the difference between W and Reagan? What would have Reagon done differently than Bush if Reagan had been president? I imagine that folks would just give you a blank stare.

McCain can't defend Bush's dismal record. So. throws out Reagan, as though this explains something.

[hendo]

7. My guess

is that they want a smaller, less intrusive government. They probably are more against the Patriot Act than the War in Iraq. Similarly, I know a few conservatives who are pissed off with the increased spending of the Bush administration.

I suppose you could try to defend Bush by saying he would be fun to have a beer with, what with his new frat boy vocab.

Although, I think what they are getting at is Reagan's popularity and the economic growth of the 80s.

It is hard to defend Bush though. Even his father was smart enough to not invade Iraq. He should have just listened to his dad and stayed out.

[krispos42]

8. Getting away from the priciples of Reagan?

Well, that's true I guess. Reagan talked to our enemies and rivals, cut-and-run withdrew from Beirut and Grenada, thought Saddam was just the bestest guy in the MidEast and gave him chemical weapons, thought Osama Bin Laden was just the bestest guy in Central Asia and gave him money and munitions, was popular and well-liked by most Americans, won election and re-election fairly, was able to effectively deliver a speech, and only committed a little bit of treason.

Maybe the Freepers have a point.

Reagan: not totally evil
Bush: totally evil

[DesertFlower]

9. i have nothing good to say

about bush.

[Radical Activist]

10. Reagan gave Iraq chemical and biological weapons agents.

But other than that I think they were pretty much the same.

[johnaries]

11. I know one difference - Reagan negotiated with terrorists.

He even gave them weapons.

[TahitiNut]

12. Bush* only had one wife?

So far? :shrug:

[PBS Poll-435]

13. No DWIs in at least 8 years.

As far as I know

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. "Reagan invadaed Granada"

Kind of like you invadaed DU?