‘Why do you like this guy?’ answered

E Pluribus Unum asked:

Krugman: One of President Bush’s great political talents is his ability to convince people who do care passionately about policy that he is one of them. Foreign-policy neoconservatives believe he shares their vision of a world transformed by American power. Economic conservatives believe he shares their dedication to dismantling the welfare state.

But a serious effort either to transform the world or to dismantle the welfare state would require sacrifices Mr. Bush hasn’t been willing to make.
OK, conservatives: why do you like this guy?

Name one positive accomplishment he has achieved, other than squandering the surplus he inherited on tax cuts for his friends?

I’m not a Bush sycophant. I am a registered Republican. I have my likes and dislikes about Mr. Bush. Want to talk social policy and economics? I’ll probably agree with many of the critiques of Bush’s tax, agriculture, and social security policy. But I thought he was the superior choice by far in last year’s election and I’m glad he’s president, because I base my vote for president almost entirely on foreign policy. I’m basically reposting this, but since the question was asked, here goes.

We had two leftover Rogue States at the end of the Cold War: Cuba and North Korea. Additionally, we saw these eight Rogue States States of Concern emerge during the 1990s: Liberia, Libya, Zimbabwe, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Sudan.

Bush, to his credit, is on track to fix some of these mistakes. This is the list of remaining “Rogue States”* circa 2004: Cuba, North Korea, Liberia, Libya, Zimbabwe, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Sudan.

So, you want a positive accomplishment? How about four?

1.) Afghanistan’s been taken care of. Bush Responsibility: TOTAL
2.) Hussein was removed from power in Iraq; currently occupatied by US troops. Bush Responsibility: TOTAL
3.) Liberia is on the mend. Bush Responsibility: MINIMAL
4.) Libya’s been scared straight. Bush Responsibility: PARTIAL

Heck, at this rate we should expect there to be just two rogue states by the end of 2008! There’s my argument in a nutshell.

Warning: You get zero points if your comment mentions either one of the Clintons, Gore or Kerry.

Well, comparisons are necessary. I don’t necessarily blame Mr. Clinton for much of the above, although he is partially responsible for Liberia (watching the country go to pot), Zimbabwe (ditto), Afghanistan (why stop with a few missiles at the terrorist training camps?), and the DPRK (letting Kim get nukes). The Republican congressional opposition bears as much responsibility for Afghanistan, but not the DPRK””?they criticized the appeasement policy vigorously, thank you.

*= The term “rogue state” was too delicate for Clinton, who preferred “States of Concern.” WTF?! As if the problem goes away or gets better by changing the goddamn name of what we call the enemy! (And yes, in that same category, this critique of GWOT name change is entirely valid.)