posted April 25, 2011 07:14 PM            

quote:

---

I say this in terms of an appeaser.
I think Bush tried to appease both sides.As such, he was respected by neither.
I think this was Bush's fatal mistake.
Reagan was respected ,perhaps not liked,but respected.
I think Bush's failure was that he was not respected cuz he appeased his foes instead of sticking to his principles
What do you(or anyone ) think?

---

I never saw Bush as an appeaser.
I would be interested to know who the foes (Dems?Liberals? UN?) were so I could look at it more closely.

He certainly held his ground with Iraq and other sensitive endeavors which drew serious flak.

posted April 25, 2011 09:38 PM            

quote:

---

In 2001, Bush signed yet another ludicrous arms reduction treaty benefiting Russia (the Moscow Treaty), which called for a reduction to 2,200 deployed nuclear warheads per side. The treaty contains no verification mechanisms, so it's impossible to check whether Moscow has complied with it or not. Bush, nonetheless, proceeded to dismantle America's strategic arsenal to insufficient levels: he dismantled all Peacekeeper ICBMs, reduced the bomber fleet, and ordered the dismantling of all AGM-129 missiles and 50% of nonstealthy ALCMs. He also ordered a drastic reduction of the nuclear stockpile.

The Bush administration stood passively by, saying nothing, when Russia threatened America's European allies with preemptive war and even a preemptive nuclear attack, even though some of these countries agreed to host an American missile defense system. The Bush administration likewise did nothing significant when Russia invaded Georgia.

True, that administration did decide to deploy a missile defense system in Europe. But the administration appeased Moscow over this issue so thoroughly that in 2007, even Zbigniew Brzezinski admitted that this appeasement policy was "pathetic."

---

I had read you were conservative, Sarah Palin is your role model and you think Bush was an appeaser. So, I`m trying to understand your political stance

posted April 26, 2011 01:32 PM            

in fact i had a great aunt who was so appalled at reagan's politics and economics that in '86 she said "i have seen the best this civilization has to offer. i reckon it's all downhill from here". she checked out altogether a few months later...

posted April 26, 2011 05:54 PM            

I think his biggest fault was in not fighting back against the lies which were told about him and his administration. But, I don't think that was appeasement. I think it was very bad advice from Karl Rove.

The tripling of Federal funds for education was a mistake. Kennedy stabbed Bush in the back and so did the teacher's unions.

The prescription drug program was a mistake.
All the demoscats wanted it but then attacked Bush after it was signed...for supposedly not publicizing it enough. They said seniors didn't know about it.

Not vetoing any legislation in his first 4 years was a mistake.

Not going after Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac even though he knew they were taking in sub prime loans which would go into foreclosure, that was a mistake. He listened to all the whining, screeching, moaning and shrieking coming out of demoscats mouths and backed off. That might have been appeasement.

But, Bush didn't back down an inch on Afghanistan or Iraq and let the whiners whine.

All in all, I would say Bush was a mixed bag.