Well Keith, you are free to drop the ad hominems and produce some
reasons. Now, your next points:

*During his tenure the world has become wealthier with the greatest distribution in the history of the world ... Fact.*

Oops, the world just lost 30 trillion$ or so, as George was
asleep at the wheel. On Bloomberg they are talking of the
biggest crisis since the great depression. Even Keith
is fleeing to gold in panic. What a hero is George!

*He appointed the highest number of African Americans and Hispanics to the highest positions in US politics ... Fact.*

That could be true, I've never checked. So what?

*He is the only President since Roosvelt/Truman to put the US in a position to win a hot war ... Fact.*

Err, you mean the US, spending more on arms then any other nation,
bombed the crap out of some little Arab country, as despite
all these arms they were beaten by the Viet Cong and still can't
catch Osama bin Laden? Wow!

*Since he declared war on terrorists the US hasn't suffered a violent cowardly attack ... Fact.*

Neither has Australia, so what? The FBI were so busy looking for
Osama under the bed, that they forgot to keep an eye on Wall St.

Compared to 8 years ago, the USA is in far worse position then
they were after Clinton Fact.

Back on the bottle yabby

To all:

What motivates people to submit 15 - 20 comments to an article? Good grief. How many new thoughts come from it? If it's a matter of getting in the last word, Keith seems determined to get it in. Don't provoke him with another response. Let him have it. This article has been beaten to death. You win, Keith. Bravo! But we'll surely best you on the next article. Stay sharp.

Daisym

Because I initially disagreed with the author was challenged, abused and ridiculed by two other posters. I was hoping somebody would actually take the time to address the issue, in a meaningful way, rather than simply sink to the usual chattering abuse of George and anyone who thinks he was ok.

Why don't you ask yabby and bushbasher the same question but use the numbers 20-25 posts and proceed to talk down to them in exactly the same way you've attempted to disparage me?

It it because of bias or something else

Keith, Daisym sent you a hint. Do us all a favor, accept it and move on. I realize that we do not have to read these remarks but I have been looking to see when the duel was going to be scheduled!

Keith,

You are beginning to see what I'm talking about, I suspect. These people care nothing for reason or debate. Which is why when you hand their arse to them, they don't recognise it.

Ergo, sword fighting an amoemba.

To them, Online Opinion is a place where they can regurgitate the latest green weekly diatribe. Very few of them have ever read an academic article where all assumptions and stated facts must be acknowledged. They simply don't understand that if you make a point you need to back it up with evidence, and defend the validity of that evidence if necessary.

Bush is an object of popular hatred for the PC-left. He is a focal point for all those things the PC-left feel are wrong with the world. A discussion absent of hype and emotion is simply not possible for many of these people. In my mind there is a definite similarity between the way many on the PC-left view Bush, and the attitude of the Ayatollah's Iran towards "the Great Satan", the US. It is simply beyond many of these people's comprehension that Bush could have done ANYTHING right.

As there is still plenty of mileage to be made blaming Bush for most of the worlds ills, especially by the incoming Obama administration, it will be a while before a balanced judgement on Bush presidency will emerge. I suspect Bush will, at least for a generation or two, suffer a reputation not unlike Nixons.

So I would say to Daiysim and Joe in the US, no-one forces you to read a post. There's a simple remedy for not getting posts that you don't want to read, so exercise it. Don't be telling people when they can and can't post. It's simply not for you to decide. And that goes double for you two, since neither of you have contributed ANYTHING of substance to the debate