We're still waiting for another Reagan...

One of the reasons why former President Clinton had disappointed me so much as an executive was not so much his inability to tell the truth, but rather the inability on his part to define a definitive set of core beliefs that made up who he really was. There was nothing genuine about the man past his ability to try and win people over through his likable nature. When his Presidency started, he went hard left and governed as a hard leftist, projecting $200+ billion deficits for each year into the future. When the Republicans took over in 1994, he back tracked and immediately started going center-right in his policy decisions. It royally pissed off liberals to no end, but it frustrated conservatives who were dragging Clinton kicking and screaming into making such policy decisions, yet getting none of the credit for their success. Clinton, in the end, was pliable because there was nothing to his core beliefs. In the end, he licked his finger, determined which way the political winds were blowing, and followed them where they took him.

Ultimately, Clinton's lack of character caught up with him, despite his overall job popularity. His character issues were so flawed that they ended up hurting Al Gore. While Gore was criticized for running a very bad campaign, the character issue used against him by his proximity to Clinton subsequently helped hand a very narrow victory over to President Bush.

I had very high hopes for President Bush. My biggest concern was that the close margin of his victory would overshadow any pretense he had about a mandate to govern the direction his administration would take.

The WTC attack initially revealed a man who's ability to lead was very sharp contrast to that of his predecessor. The President drew a line in the sand and spoke for all Americans when he, for all intent and purpose, said "enough is enough".

This act of drawing a line in the sand was reminiscent of another President who also stood up against what was perceived as an unconquerable foe. Ronald Wilson Reagan, the man who rightfully called the former Soviet Union an evil empire, took on all enemies, both foreign and domestic, all at once.

He eliminated an unjust and woefully burdensome series of tax penalties levied against the American people for years. His ideas and beliefs were so powerful and resonated with so many Americans that he took on both a House and Senate littered with democrats and bent them in his direction. He inherited a faltering military and transformed it into the most advanced and lethal fighting force on the planet. He got in the face of the Russians and refused to compromise this country's security to appease their aggression. He refused to let liberal detractors get in his way or define who he was, and as a result, he was and still is admired by a vast majority of those of use who were fortunate enough to live during his stewardship of this nation.

I have lived through and remembered what life was like during the Presidencies of Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George HW Bush, William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and George W. Bush. Not one of the President's I have watched has ever come close to matching Ronald Reagan's class, style, patriotism, optimism and unwaivering love on this country.

George W Bush is no Ronald Reagan. He never was, not even close. Outside of his stances on taxes and the war against Islamic terrorism, President Bush has been a profound disappointment and an albatross around the neck of every conservative in the country. I won't be sorry to see him go, but I shudder to think that after the liberal moonbats manage to exclusively sink their talons into this country, people will look back at the Presidency of George W Bush and say "ah...those were the days".