Ease up please. Feel free to disagree with me, but don't let's be rude.
He even fired the guy that had the job Melhman and Gillespie previously held because he produced poor results in 2000 with Reps losing seats.
It's normal for a President to put his own RNC Chair in. That doesn't prove that Bush cares more about his party than anyone else. I will state for the record that Bush is the reason why the party has comfortable margins in the House and Senate. His work in 2002 and 2004 was yeoman and admirable with the glaring exception of Pennsylvania, which stunted the career of Pat Toomey, elected a leftist in Specter, and in the end Pennsylvania went Democrat anyway. It accomplished nothing for Bush or the Party in the long term.
He's practiced some conservative philosophies, but in that sense he wasn't like Reagan who devoted himself to growing the conservative movement but didn't grow the Party.
He had the opportunity to do both. Few Presidents are presented with a fanatically loyal base coupled with successful leadership during a national security crisis. Bush has the chance to change American politics for decades to come ala Roosevelt, and it is slipping away unless he finds his legs now.
The conservative movement is big enough now to grow itself, G.W.'s turned his eye to growing the Republican Party instead.
A party without a purpose or guiding principle is no party at all. The base is unsure what the party stands for, and at this point will not bother turning out the vote this fall. The Republican Party will have to work hard to pick up the pieces in time for 2008, much less 2006.
Whatever one's opinion of the decision, he can't be held responsible for not being a rhetorical movement conservative when everyone knew that when he was first nominated.
Like you, I knew exactly what we were getting in 2000, but I still fault him for it. Bush's political ideology, though far more complete than his father's, was never fully formed. The Iraq invasion was literally the first time in his political life that Bush ever risked losing an election for the sake of an issue. He handled it admirably, without backing down for even an instant.
Yet there is more to a polical philosophy than that. Bush believes in loyalty, service, patriotism, etc., but when you get down to concrete issues he allows simple political calculation to guide him too often. Social Security reform was a real stab at greatness, but Bush tried to give people half a loaf; he failed to advocate a complete break with a failing system, and tried to toe the political line with a "personal accounts" scheme without explaining to people exactly why taking more money out of the system would save it. It was a political plan, not a decisive one, and it failed completely.
My bottom line: Bush nudged above true Greatness on several occasions, but has lost all momentum. Along with 9/11 the next 11 months will be the biggest test of his Presidency.
I'm thankful that Bush won't be allowed to stick a "North American Union" feather in his cap by the end of his term.
However, it's only a matter of time before it happens, since both major Parties are bent on it coming into being.
NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO, FTAA, GATT are all just run ups to the ultimate goal.
Ultimately, the other charades are all just window dressing. Always keep your eye on the most deadly ball, not just any ball.