Originally Posted By: twosleepy
 Originally Posted By: Aramis
Then once it is embraced by the coddling apologists and put in a dictionary it can make its contribution to "retardify" the language.

Isn't that a Bushism? I hardly can listen to the man without wanting to tear out my prescriptivist hair... but wouldn't he be the poster child darling of descriptivists? He personifies that make-it-up-as-you-go free-wheeling linguism.... :0)

...which is nowhere near the definition of descriptivism.
Bushisms are simply, well, Bushisms. They are most noticeable not so much for their grammatical errors as for their logical errors. In that sense he is much more aligned with the prescriptivist camp.
...what dzhaymz & faldy said.