But, they haven't figured Bush out yet. The guy is about audacious, STRUCTURAL revolutionary change. The Education bill was spending money to move power from D.C. to local authority. The Prescription bill is the proverbial nose of the camel leading to the first private managment of any facet of that leviathan black hole. That's why the Democrats are apoplectic about it.
It's hilarious how the "jig is up" for all our third party poseurs here: they're with the Democrats 90% of the time these days. They're just opposed to any political entity in power, whatever party. They embrace Reagan because the last time they supported anybody was 1984, and they probably sat that one out and kvetched from sideline then too!
Get your popcorn, this is going to be like watching a John Waters movie, without the feminine charms of Divine.
Well, you are right. Read that essay if you have time. Meanwhile, I also am enjoying the show. It is fascinating to see who gets what's going on (Newt, Tony Blankley, Fred Barnes) and who doesn't (Rush, George Will).
That is exactly right. To use a football analogy, the Republicans intercepted the dims pass deep in our territory and now we have possession of the ball(AARP) and moving it in the right direction. It'll take years to refine the issue to our liking since it is so complex, but now that we have the ball we call the plays and control the clock.
What most people don't understand, it took one hell of an effort just to get possession of the ball. To think we were going to intercept the ball and run it 99 yards for a touchdown is unrealistic. All we have to do now is play incremental ball control offense and in 5-10 years, it'll end up looking like the bill we wanted all along. Just look at how we incrementally did the tax cuts.
In a nutshell, incrementalism is not only smart politics it is smart policy. Those that are screaming and hollering idealogical purity know little about getting real results, let alone winning elections.