George W. Bush Was a Failure

George W. Bush was a failed president but not for the reasons spouted by liberals. They'll tell you he lied the nation into war in an effort to secure unfettered access to Iraqi oil for himself, Darth Cheney and their greedy Halliburton friends, as opposed to his stated goal of prosecuting the War on Terror launched in response to the Islamist terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. "No More Blood for Oil" was the liberal chant. To believe this is to ignore a few hidden, inconvenient truths. Ahem. It ignores the atrocities of 9/11 completely. It ignores the war that al Qaeda and its like-minded affiliates have been waging against us with or without our vigorous military response. It ignores the fact that the oil we're supposedly stealing to enrich the Bush family is based over 10,000 miles from the American mainland. It ignores the fact that the amount of oil we're supposedly stealing is significantly less in quantity than what we could drill for right here in America. And it also ignores the fact that drilling here not only creates jobs and prosperity in the reborn American oil industry, it comes with the added benefit of sparing the American people the unbearable costs paid in human life that come with a "unilateral cowboy" launching a global war. What a deal!

They'll also tell you he was a radical pro-lifer (as if it's a bad thing to be in favor of life) who banned embryonic stem cell research in an effort to further his implementation of a Christian theocratic government, even though he was the first American president to ever allow federal funding for research of any kind for pre-existing embryonic stem cell lines. For the liberals, though, it wasn't enough to draw the line there. They wanted, and received from Barack Obama, federal taxpayer dollars to be spent subsidizing the deliberate engineering of human life to be manipulated and destroyed on the altar of "science" and "progress". To play god, so to speak.

They'll tell you he appointed radicals to the Supreme Court of the United States. They'll tell you this while doing everything in their power to trick you into believing the fairy tale that judges possess the unlimited authority to make the Constitution mean whatever they need it to mean at that moment. If you believe in that fairy tale you will naturally draw the conclusion that it's radical to interpret the Constitution according to the words actually found in our national, binding, legal contract. In an effort to disabuse yourself of this ludicrous notion, perhaps don't think of the Constitution as a "living, breathing" document, but rather an individual mortgage contract with the owners of the bank (the Founders of the Republic).

They'll tell you that George W. Bush, a born-again Christian, eagerly tortured innocent human beings who mistakenly happened upon the battlefield. And he did it for no other reason than to achieve his goal of unfettered access to less oil than we could drill for right here in America. To enrich his friends. At the unbearable cost of human life. If they convince you of that, you'll likely also believe that a good and decent man's unflinching efforts to protect you and your neighbors with every conceivable legitimate, constitutional power at his disposal (including the ones that are unthinkable to the more squeamish among us but constitutionally permissible nonetheless) are somehow an assault on the Constitution itself.

So they'll tell you that for these and other similar reasons, George W. Bush was a failure as a President of the United States. But they would be decidedly wrong.

George W. Bush was a failure for other reasons.

George W. Bush's failure stems directly from the fact that he and Barack Obama are indistinguishable in one very significant way. Both men used the language of Ronald Reagan to get elected and governed in ways that would repulse Ronald Reagan, who most certainly is rolling in his grave. Ronald Reagan was an unabashed ideological conservative. George W. Bush, like his father, was not. Both Bush men wanted to be president and both took the short, guaranteed route to victory: the Reagan route. Obama, on the other hand, took the route with the conscious goal of destroying the Reagan coalition suddenly orphaned by the failed presidencies of the two Presidents Bush.

In claiming the Reagan mantle George W. Bush communicated to the American people that he was the man to relegate modern day liberalism to the same scratch and dent bin as communism, which has found its long-awaited and eager discount shopper in Barack Obama. Instead with Bush we got: No Child Left Behind; McCain-Feingold; expansion of liberal entitlement schemes; the addition of new liberal entitlement schemes; Harriet Miers and Alberto Gonzales; the federal subsidization of the destruction of human life; more dependency on the daily whims of the OPEC cartel. And dozens of others that breathed new life into the liberal cause.

Reagan's third and fourth terms, tacitly promised by George W. Bush, meant the successful dismantling of the federal welfare state, returning to the States their sole constitutional authority to legislate on matters of the retirement and health care of its citizens. It meant the immediate dissolution of entire unconstitutional departments of the federal government that seized authority from the States, worked only to acquire more power for itself and served only to destroy the liberties of the American people. It meant the appointment of an uncompromising and unrelenting slate of originalist federal judges that would finish the quiet efforts of the entire Reagan Administration to return the judiciary to its proper, constitutional role. It meant the immediate resumption of the full-on assault, from every conceivable angle, on the constitutional monstrosity called Roe versus Wade. It meant restoring the American dollar to the gold standard, ensuring the permanent stability inherent in the American system Reagan had worked tirelessly to restore after decades of abuse by politicians of both parties. It meant exercising every legitimate, constitutionally authorized power at his disposal in order to restore to the American people their inalienable right to govern themselves. It meant a Constitution finally and permanently re-rooted in the original intent of its Framers. Ronald Reagan was the last truly beloved president, and he was beloved for his efforts on behalf of the American people. He needed two more terms at most to finish the job he had been hired for, but term limits required a successor. The cancer of modern day liberalism was dying. It was on the cusp of permanent discredit as a viable political ideology. By claiming the mantle of Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush promised us he was the man to lead the Reagan Revolution to complete, decisive and irreversible victory.

He wasn't, and liberalism was granted a new lease on life by the used car salesman from Chicago.

For that, George W. Bush was a colossal failure.

The Perversion of Civil Rights

Once upon a time a great man led the American crusade for equal rights for all of the American people, not just white Americans. This man believed with his whole heart the central premise of the Declaration of Independence: that all men were created equal and endowed with the same inalienable rights regardless of race, religion, creed, economic status, etc. And that all of these men, women and children who made this great nation called America were entitled to the Constitutionally guaranteed equal protection of the law.

My how things have changed since Dr. King gave his "I Have a Dream" speech. What was once a battle on the moral high-ground of true equality has been perverted by hucksters of all types to be a war waged in the mud of demagoguery. Whereas Dr. King wanted all men to be judged by the content of their character, we now draw distinction of class warfare between "the rich" and "the poor." Whereas Dr. King believed that all were entitled to equality under the law, we now describe the murder of nascent human life as "the right to choose" as if it is nothing more than a matter of mere convenience. Whereas once we had the moral clarity as a people to define a mortal enemy of the Republic we are paralyzed by political correctness so as not to offend the delicate sensibilities of those who murder in the name of the rabid politicization of Islam. Whereas once it was self-evident that marriage is the union, before G-d, of man and woman, now we face the wholesale redefinition to include anyone who loves another person. Or two people. Or more. Whereas once a person who mutilated their bodies would be referred for robust psychotherapy, now we grant it the legitimacy of government sanction and a fancy acronym.

But what about real civil rights? What about the right of the American people to be safe in both person and property, the bulwark of American liberty? What about the right of the American people to protect themselves, their families and their property? What about the right of the American people to work hard and enjoy the fruits of their labor? What about the right of the American people to succeed or fail on their own merits? What about the right of the American people to be treated equally under the law, instead of granting special privileges to specially defined classes? What about the right of the American people to expect their government to behave responsibly? What about the right of the American people to speak freely? What about the very first civil right of the American people, the right to worship freely?

These are the real civil rights that get short shrift nowadays because it's not politically correct to talk about them. Today we stand by and watch an American jihadist gun down a group of American soldiers and instead of collective outrage, the elite liberal media wonders what we all did as a people to lead this man to his rampage. Where was our government in protecting the civil rights of those soldiers who were murdered in a cold blooded act of treason? They were too busy promoting "diversity" to be concerned about the infiltration of the United States military. General Casey said it himself that the greatest tragedy of the Fort Hood massacre would be if diversity was another casualty. Is he serious?

Let's be clear. The idea that American civil rights include the right to sexually deviant behavior, self-mutilation protected by the Constitution, the redefinition of the institution of marriage, the right to murder unborn human life and the rest of the laundry list of abhorrent behavior promoted by groups like the North American Man Boy Love Association (yes, you read that right) is beyond ludicrous. If everything is a "civil right" then nothing is an actual civil right. If the Constitution means anything the regressive socialists wish it to mean then the Constitution actually means nothing. And if that's the case, why on earth did our Founding Fathers even bother fighting the War of Independence?