First, he states that the Constitution limits powers of the federal government.
Then, you call him a fool for saying that, because the Constitution LIMITS powers of the federal government. Huh?
You are both in agreement and right on that. You just don't like--and I also disagree with him on it--the conclusion he draws from it. Is it because he later said that the Republican majority will be gone in 10 years? That would have been a preposterous conclusion 3 years ago, but I'll wager any amount of money you wish to bet--we'll have to go to Nevada or someplace where it is legal--that he is correct. The conditions to maintain that majority are being squandered rapidly. Before you accept, you might ask yourself what prominent Republicans even have a conservative agenda, much less would push it, "damn the torpedos."
Just ask yourself, with the exception of blather and minuscule tax cuts, just what Mr. Bush has done in his administration that is different from what Lyndon Johnson did or would have done.
How about defending the country against terrorists, taking the fight to them, signing a partial birth abortion ban, nominating conservative judges, reversing Clinton's stupid environmental rules, banning governmental funding of fetal stem cell research, etc, etc. And the reduction of capital gains taxes and taxes on dividends were monumental, not miniscule.