But, this view of the Bush years is mine, in a nice nutshell. Notice how there really aren't any social conservative "goods" either, that a libertarian might obviously be against. The faith-based initiatives were puny, Terri Shiavo case was more of a Congressional thing (though obviously Bush approved of it), he said something right before the 2004 election about the Federal Marriage Amendment but never brought it up after being elected, he split the difference on stem cells, etc. He did fund abstinence programs, but they're no more worthless then condom education. On more negative things (from my perspective) his DOJ sided with Washington D.C. in Heller, he was for full blown amnesty for illegal immigrants, his people are the reason we have a trillion dollar deficits. It's hard to call any one who said (in relation to the stimulus), something along the lines of , "I had to destroy capitalism to save it" as being particularly conservative.
There is not a single group within the Republican coalition he didn't piss off. Those of us who still (barely) supported him at the end did so because of the Iraq War and following through with it. Also, especially as the congress became Democrat controlled he discovered his veto pen, at times. That and as the article linked above says, he's better (we thought) then the alternative.
