Via email from a frequent commenter here who said, " Wanted to post the following comment, but it wasn't clear (to me) under which entry was best to post the comment... If you see fit to add it, OK." . I'll just let Hugh speak his piece here:
This nation really, Really, REALLY needs a major catharsis--any definition one chooses.
I've been a Dubya supporter for a while now. However, I'm beginning to think it's OK for him to go down in flames--he's kicked his conservative base in the shins too often. He started out as a Republican, but he's transitioned into a RINO.
Most all presidents tend to move to the center, but he's gone far overboard trying to out Dimo-crat the Democrats on domestic issues.
He was definitely the lesser of the evils in both elections. Having said that, one of my friends reminds me from time to time that voting for the lesser of the evils is still voting for evil.
No, I don't think Dubya is evil per sé. He recognizes appeasement doesn't work with radical Islamists who want to kill us all. Yet, he has worked "overtime" trying to appease Dimo-crats. That will never work. No amount of apppeasement ever works--it only stiffens the opposition by thinking they've won "one more." So far they've won several more by his appeasement attempts.
Catharsis? How about cutting the federal welfare programs--all of them! When the freeloaders have to work for their food and housing, then perhaps there won't be so many jobs available for illegal aliens that "Americans don't want to do."
Let the states do what they will with welfare--get the feds out! All welfare should go back to the local churches (synagogues, etc.) and charity organizations.
With the feds out of welfare we can cut both the budget and taxes.
Another budget/tax cut would come with getting the feds out of education. Again, let states and locals handle education.
To use an old aviation idiom: Dubya, being a former aviator, has "screwed the pooch." What's worse, he continues to do it. (That terminology ain't got nothing to do with Lady Laura!)
There's more, but that's sufficient for now.
I think Hugh makes some valid points. One of the reasons President Bush got no slack from some on the Miers nomination was the perception that he was soft on "Dhimicratic Terrorism"-and all these issues certainly fed into that. Comments?
