![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
First, on Bush:
He hasn't replaced Reagan as the conservative idol (JFK, near as I can tell, is the liberals'). From a pretty mainstream Republican's standpoint, there were some things he succeeded at (i.e. protecting the country after 9/11, [eventually] appointing two good Justices) and other instances where he disappointed (immigration, the bailouts, Harriet Meyers, oy). And then there were other things, mostly social polices, that fell by the wayside. History will show whether or not the liberation of Iraq, and having a relatively friendly democracy in the region, was worth the blood and treasure.
I think it's important to point out that when Bush's approval ratings were their lowest, it wasn't because he was such an uber-conservative. (There aren't that many liberals in the country.) It was because he did things to piss off the left and the right. But I do believe that the decisions he made he made with only good intentions and the desire to do what he saw was right. Unless you want a President who takes a poll every time he makes a decision, I guess that's all you can ask for.
Now, Obama.
I've been thinking about this editorial: Pray Obama Fails
The gist is that "everyone on both sides is being nice and polite and bipartisan and saying they hope Obama succeeds. Well, I don't want him to." Rush has said much the same thing.
Here's the crux: I don't want Obama to fail as in be a failure as in be a bad President. Unlike those suffering under Bush Derangement Syndrome, I'm not so hyper-partisan that I would rather see the country suffer than a man I didn't vote for do well. I want Obama to succeed in preventing another terror attack on the US or our interests. I want Obama to succeed in getting the economy back on track.
However, I don't want Obama to succeed in tying the hands of our intelligence-gathering capabilities by forcing the Army field manual on the CIA. I don't want Obama to succeed in trying to repair the economy on the backs of taxpayers and business owners. I don't want Obama to succeed in passing some Godforsaken amnesty bill. I don't want him to succeed in holding unconditional talks with leaders of rogue, terrorist, or terrorist-supporting states. If I wanted to see these things happened, I would have voted for the guy.
There's a big difference in hoping for the failure of the man and hoping for the failure of (some of) the man's policies. That's something that the people with BDS never quite grasped: you don't have to figuratively (or literally) burn a man in effigy in order to display your opposition to his positions. I hope that during the next four years, conservatives remember this, and don't counter the Obama cult of worship with an anti-Obama cult of hatred. Leave that kind of stuff to the Koses of the world.
He hasn't replaced Reagan as the conservative idol (JFK, near as I can tell, is the liberals'). From a pretty mainstream Republican's standpoint, there were some things he succeeded at (i.e. protecting the country after 9/11, [eventually] appointing two good Justices) and other instances where he disappointed (immigration, the bailouts, Harriet Meyers, oy). And then there were other things, mostly social polices, that fell by the wayside. History will show whether or not the liberation of Iraq, and having a relatively friendly democracy in the region, was worth the blood and treasure.
I think it's important to point out that when Bush's approval ratings were their lowest, it wasn't because he was such an uber-conservative. (There aren't that many liberals in the country.) It was because he did things to piss off the left and the right. But I do believe that the decisions he made he made with only good intentions and the desire to do what he saw was right. Unless you want a President who takes a poll every time he makes a decision, I guess that's all you can ask for.
Now, Obama.
I've been thinking about this editorial: Pray Obama Fails
The gist is that "everyone on both sides is being nice and polite and bipartisan and saying they hope Obama succeeds. Well, I don't want him to." Rush has said much the same thing.
Here's the crux: I don't want Obama to fail as in be a failure as in be a bad President. Unlike those suffering under Bush Derangement Syndrome, I'm not so hyper-partisan that I would rather see the country suffer than a man I didn't vote for do well. I want Obama to succeed in preventing another terror attack on the US or our interests. I want Obama to succeed in getting the economy back on track.
However, I don't want Obama to succeed in tying the hands of our intelligence-gathering capabilities by forcing the Army field manual on the CIA. I don't want Obama to succeed in trying to repair the economy on the backs of taxpayers and business owners. I don't want Obama to succeed in passing some Godforsaken amnesty bill. I don't want him to succeed in holding unconditional talks with leaders of rogue, terrorist, or terrorist-supporting states. If I wanted to see these things happened, I would have voted for the guy.
There's a big difference in hoping for the failure of the man and hoping for the failure of (some of) the man's policies. That's something that the people with BDS never quite grasped: you don't have to figuratively (or literally) burn a man in effigy in order to display your opposition to his positions. I hope that during the next four years, conservatives remember this, and don't counter the Obama cult of worship with an anti-Obama cult of hatred. Leave that kind of stuff to the Koses of the world.
