I can only imagine how a Democrat administration would have given the author grist for his mill...
Yes,we the people make the decisions.We must take the country in the "right" direction.It is up to us.
The DC Circuit judges are a clear positive. And there is a reasonable prospect that the judicial appointment issue is not over yet.
However other than that, it is difficult to see any real difference in public policy between the Bush Administration and a hypothetical Kerry Administration. Kerry would have been weaker and less effective but given the policy direction, that is a positive.
As proposed, the Social Security "Private Account" reform is a Wall Street bailout, not a Social Security reform. The means test proposal is crazy--the determination of "means" is how much money the retiree made during productive life; if he lost it all and has no means, he still is treated as rich and loses FDIC payments. That is simply nuts. If you were going to means test Social Security which I would favor, you would do so based on current period tax return income. I oppose all of the current proposals.
Private accounts which simply set aside money in the name of the FDIC payor and vest rights to the money, perhaps coupled with means testing, in exchange for limitation on public funding after 2018 might be a true "reform" but the government is not going to do that.
Abortion is somewhat of a red herring issue.
It is clearly murder; it clearly violates God's Law.
But in our secular legal world, the test is different. The Constitution provides that "no person shall be deprived of life, . . . . without due process of law". State (and federal law) that permits abortion after life commences is unconstitutional, based on the litteral language of our fundament law.
Pro abortion forces should be encouraged to resolve the existing dispute by attempting to amend the constitution to provide an exception for non-due process termination of life by the mother; perhaps limited to periods before the third month.
But absent a change in the constitution, this argument gets resolved on facts and literal words on paper. Maybe you can't prove personhood before month three or two or whatever; but at the end of the day, you are looking for judges who will apply the literal words.
The judges are the only thing you get from the Republicans--and you need to hope for three Supreme Court vacancies not coming from the Rheinquist, Scalia, Thomas group (presumably at least four in total).
I respectfully do not agree with mysterio--I see Mrs. Clinton as a clear winner against any Republican currently on the table.
The only political salvation I see is to get money together to get truly organized to support a serious third party movement. At this point, there is enough dissension among both Republicans and Democrats that a third party candidate focused on the borders; foreign policy; and the economy would have a real chance to win.
Subject to the Constitution, not the whim of any one political party.