trying to grok

It is understandable that you are trying to compensate for the external pressure. One has to be careful though not to overcompensate - one would no longer be oneself but just an inverted reflection of the environment.

Best wishes (and keep up the good work with your blog!)

sarah what amazes me as a spouse of an active-duty serviceman you support this clown.if bush 43 and cronies had it their way there will be more deployment in small FOB places like bulgaria,central asia,etc and damned the servicemembers family.and also i'm shocked that you support a man if he had his way he would overturn roe v wade.like the f*****g government has a right to tell you what you can or can not do with your body.

And thanks to tommy for highlighting Sarah's point in case anyone had missed it.

Tommy, you need to understand that a LOT of people in the military like Bush and dislike Clinton. Not all for the same reason.

Bush is a far more pro-military president and has shown much more respect for the military. That is a personal level kind of thing. Heck, most of my union brothers support Bush and I've heard less vitriolic Demo-hating from Sean Hannity (though far worse from Dems) and they're all Democrats. So.......

Kalroy

kalroy that's what i find so amazing.bush 43 has been trying to CUT veteran benefits in a time of war.and the base closings.and the stop-loss orders.and the IRR call ups.and this fancy new robocop type 21st century star-wars garbage.and that's just the military i won't even get started on his domestic policies.why do the troops like him so much it's obvious he tells them what they want to hear.wraps himself in patriotic rhetoric.and tells them they're doing great work(which most of them are)if he had it his way entirely he would outsource more money and jobs to the private contractors.just something to keep in mind.

Thank you so much Sarah. I have an active-duty son in the Army who is scheduled to ship out Iraq the last of Sept. He loves his country, his God, and his president. So what if Pres. Bush has made some mistakes? Oh my gosh, I guess it's true then, he is human. If he was slow to react to Katrina, I'm sure of one thing. It wasn't because he has a Monica in the Oval Office and couldn't be disturbed!

I just want to say thanks for remaining unmoved by disapproval of your opinions about the President and military. It's a hard thing to support both/any of those, and I respect you for being both honest and firm. I read your blog frequently. :)

I plan to enlist in the Marine Corps next fall and am eager to serve in Iraq. I've gotten huge amounts of flak about this from my family, teachers, and other people I respect.

When I enlist, I'll be pointing my Corps sisters to your journal, saying "here, at least, is someone who appears to be on our side."

Kimberly & Mick -- it means a lot to hear you say that. I thought I'd get a lot of flak for this post, so it's nice to hear that others understand. And any time I feel like the pressure is too great, like people are getting me down and making me feel bad about myself, I just think that President Bush gets out of bed every day, even though there are posters of him with Hitler's mustache. He's one of the strongest men I can think of. (And Bunker's one of the smartest and CPT Sims is one of the most honorable.)

Just curious: Would you describe Bush as one of the smartest and most honorable men you know? Especially smartest. It is hard for me to believe that anyone could really be in awe of the man. Even if you agree with the majority of his decisions, on a personal level he seems like such an insipid echo of Reagan, with whom he is usually compared. I was watching old video of Reagan the other day, and whatever you might think about his politics, the man was an incredibly powerful speaker. He had a commanding presence, real gravitas. When Bush speaks, the word "lightweight" just forces itself into your mind. His one Presidential moment was the speech right after 9/11; that was very well done. Normally, though, he can't say more than a few words at a time without pausing, even right in the middle of a sentence where no pause is appropriate, and he says the most serious things as if he is just about to laugh... I'm not going to descend to calling him stupid, because no one really stupid gets elected President. But even if we were going to have a president from the conservative wing of the Republican party, couldn't we have had one who looks and acts like a President? Next to Bush, even someone like Trent Lott looks presidential.

And while W. may not have been getting a Monica during the hurricane, can we really be sure that he hadn't been felled by yet another killer pretzel? :)

Sarah,
Stick to your values - you have thought things through, and you are as entitled to your views as anyone. (Just another one of the rights our military sacrifices so much to protect!)

To those who want to question W's esteemed position on her list of 3, I am sure Sarah can speak for herself quite well. But one thing that has not been pointed out is that W has a strong sense of what is right. He makes decisions and sticks with them, despite the support and backlash which are both inevitable in our open society. And he has a moral compass that is constant. This is a real draw. I may not agree with him all the time, but I sure can predict what his position will be, and I can rely on him to stay the course. Intestinal fortitude is a much rarer commodity than we think these days, and I value it.

Thanks, Sarah, for being so willing to share your views, even when you expect to get push back. It is a sign that you have the same type of character that I admire - regardless of political views.

Pericles - Bush isn't a great speaker.

But I'd rather have a President who does what he says, than a President who makes compelling speeches and then doesn't do anything.

tommy - Your keyboard has a shift key and a space bar. Find them and use them. If your keyboard doesn't have a shift key and a space bar, your can cut and paste some of these: ABCDEFGHIJKLM NOPQRSTUVWXYZ. Oh, and here are some commas for you as well: ,,,,,, Hope that helps.

Pixy and jck-
Thanks for ytour comments. jck raises a fair point about Bush's constancy, but surely there is a golden mean between "blowing in the wind" on the one hand and sheer pigheadedness on the other. Bush depicted Kerry as being at one extreme, but isn't he at the other?

Pixy makes a fair point, too; there are things more important than eloquence and bearing. Of course we want a President who follows through and what he or she promises, to the exent this is possible. With all of the people in the country, though, couldn't we find someone with ALL of the qualities we want? Besides, does Bush really follow through on what he promises? You may be focusing on foreign policy, but what about "compassionate conservatism." A lot of the programs he talked about have received far less funding than he pledged: No Child Left Behind, fighting AIDS in Africa, etc. Closer to foreign policy, remember how he went from saying that he would fire anyone who leaked Plame's identity to saying that he would fire anyone who committed a crime? He isn't really as steadfast as the two of you suggest.

"kalroy that's what i find so amazing.bush 43 has been trying to CUT veteran benefits in a time of war.and the base closings.and the stop-loss orders.and the IRR call ups.and this fancy new robocop type 21st century star-wars garbage."

Tommy, I call BS on all of that. First off, elementary school civics lesson; CONGRESS has power of the purse, not the President. Blame congress. Secondly, the stop loss and IRR call ups were neccessary during the first Gulf war. It is more necessary due to the post Cold War cuts.

If you want to blame anyone for the military cuts it has been a bi-partisan effort on the part of congress. You do realize that the majority effort, however, has been on the part of the Democrats; many of whom support the military, but a large, vocal part is actively anti-military and have been calling for far more draconian cuts than were made under Clinton (during both the Republican congress and more so during the Democrat congress).

You're going to have to realize that though their are exceptions on both sides, the Democrats EARNED their anti-military reputation through both word and deed.

Kalroy

Kalroy-
Remember that those military cuts started during Bush I. It was called the Peace Dividend back then... we won the Cold War so we didn't need as large of a military force.
There is an element of BS to the "Congress has the power of the purse" argument anyway. Everyone knows that the president has a lot of influence here also. If the prez. puts something in the initial budget proposal, fights hard for it, but Congress still strikes it, then okay, the responsibility belongs to Congress. Otherwise, it isn't so clear.

With all of the people in the country, though, couldn't we find someone with ALL of the qualities we want?

Well, clearly not.

If you want to blame anyone for the military cuts it has been a bi-partisan effort on the part of congress.

With Republicans holding majorities in both chambers? Bi-partisan doesn't mean one party doing things in two different branches of the government.

Hint to "Visitor": The military cuts started over a decade ago.

Sarah,

I think about Bunker very often, too, and go to his page just to click on the link, a lot.

You're a good egg: keep up the fire.

Paulie

I, too, think of Bunker daily. I sure do miss him...

Another military family here who supports Bush. Husband and I both think Bush is a good leader. Personally, I think he's too big of a spender (my libertarian leanings showing) and should have vetoed SOMETHING by now lol. However, when it comes to defending this nation, I trust him. I thank God that Gore wasn't in office on September 11th. All we needed was another president who lead by polls and focus groups as that idiot Clinton did.