How bout no terrorist attacks since the Bush Doctrine became US national policy. Does that count for anything? How quickly we all forget. I agree his second term has been weak (especially the lack of leadership on illegal immigration) but it's obvious as the country has completely recovered from the most devastating attack on US soil in history, one man deserves the credit:
President Bush. That's why we was reelected in 2004.
Unfortunately, as the horrors and vivid images of 9/11 fade...
The fact people keep carping about every other ancillary issue is a tribute to how well his administration ensured everything has returned to business as usual. I don't think the same could have been said had Al Gore been in charge.
If we look at WACO and Elian Gonzalez, at home, we can say with some assurance, that Al Gore would have pushed the panic button and violated civil liberties worse than any Patriot Act. Meanwhile, Saddam would still be the Big Man in the ME, playing cat and mouse with the feckless, corrupt UN and conspiring with terrorists everywhere, behind the scenes. If Al Gore were in charge, the Democrats would have used terrorism to push through their unconstitutional gun reform. If Al Gore were in charge, after a few symbolic cruise missile stikes, Bin Laden, the Taliban and Saddam, would be back in business. No boots on the ground strategy for Democrats. Too messy. It'll impact their approval ratings. So 100,000+ US soliders would be stuck in the desert waiting for 'containment' to kick in., with no end in sight. And the economy would be in the shitter, because without the Bush tax cuts, the economy would have never recovered after 9/11. All this while Al Gore would be leading the charge in "the war on global warming" pushing a patent junk science that would forever infringe on the rights of THE PEOPLE, in this great free country.
No thank you. Bush isn't perfect, and he's not Ronald Reagan, but as Rudi once said,
"Thank God George Bush is our president."
Thank God, indeed.
