We already hold the White House and Congress.
That's why I've stated before that this is the most disappointing presidency in my lifetime.
We all know about the runaway discretionary spending allowed by this administration i.e. the failure to veto pork-laden budgets, the big new prescription drug entitlement program that will only grow ever larger, the billions for top-down education programs of dubious merit, other billions for other plans.
Bush has nominated what are hopefully conservative Circuit Court candidates (remember Souter?) but hasn't really fought for them. Recess appointing Pickering is a good window dressing move but might actually be a bad move in the end. Pickering will be under the microscope - his decisions will be parsed for finding or manufacturing maximum anti-Bush ammo RE future nomination fights. The Dims are not, in effect, following the Constitution in the up or down requirement for judge confirmations. Bush should have long ago forced a showdown with Chuckie, Hillary and Teddy.
Patriot Act: Scary but necessary? Hard to say.
OK, enough with the other negative stuff. And of course Bush has some actual conservative chips on his side of the ledger. Abortion, taxes, defense of marriage, inspiring as C-in-C. Iraq would be less unsettling if they actually had found the WMD.
Now for the [we can't call it] amnesty plan, briefly. We believe Bush to be a man of his word right? So Bush must believe that this importation of a massive low-skilled and under-educated workforce willing to work for very low wages is a good thing. It of course is madness (born of a desire to attract Hispanic votes, IMO). It is very simply importing poverty. Low wages + large families = taxpayer support for these "disadvantaged households". "Madness" is what my co-workers say to describe this amnesty plan. I agree.
I live in a high-illegal area, a mature county where overall growth is small. But our schools are bursting, more are being built and teachers are needed. My property taxes are going up to pay the increased spending for schools and teachers and admin personnel, etc. The state people, the county people, the school people, the papers all say it's because of the influx of the "migrants".
So this is where I am: I can not easily support Bush, the amnesty is the last straw and a big one. Bush should easily win Georgia, he won't need me. So I'm currently for the "message" vote. The message is stop being a vote-buying RINO selling out my country. I'm voting my tagline (Tancredo) unless a better alternative emerges such as a true Conservative Third Party being born. My best case scanario is that Bush wins, but very closely. AND that his polling shows Rove that it's not a good thing to take your base for granted. Right now I am not a part of that base. A Bush landslide will only show widespread support for Bush's bad policies. Is such support the message you want to send to the White House?
As an aside, I may get to vote for Denise Majette again if Cynthia Mckinney runs for the GA-4th again, he he he.
If the Presidential race here in GA looks close, I'll perhaps reassess my positions.
An example of the long-term disadvantage of importing low-wage workers that you can relate to: Australia grows grapes, for wine I guess. Anyway, the situation developed where the Australian vineyards faced the choice of importing cheap labor or developing technology to meet their needs.
They chose technology. They developed a system of cutting the grape vines (at the ground if I have that right) then transporting them to a building where the grapes are mechanically harvested. This resulted in a 20% increase in grapes harvested at a lower cost than using low-wage workers. And the vines grow back better the article said.
That was the author of the article's point: Cheap labor makes the investment in technology seem like a bad way for business to go when the opposite is true. Technology investment = more profit which is good for everyone. Except the "migrants" I guess.