That pretty much sums it up, IMO. I think everyone who disillusioned with W has some event they can finger as the breaking point -- mine was Harriet Meirs. The whole affair might have been pandering to the base, but it was so clumsy and heavy-handed that it left me wondering if Mr. Bush has the slightest idea of who the base is, or what conservativism and judicial restraint is all about.
Your point on the ports deal is also well made, particularly as it followed so closely on the "cartoon" mayhem; the average joe may not pay too much attention to politics, but it seems the grass-roots reaction to the Dubai deal was something akin to "What the f___?"
Cognitive dissonance? Perhaps. Hubris may be a more accurate term -- or a combination of both.
You're right. I go for the combination: cognitive dissonance on the part of the voters, hubris on the part of the administration.
Bush is not a conservative in the traditional mold. He is looking for conservative outcomes, not conservative process. His objective is to give people more control over their lives and less control by government. If removing a program or reducing it's size will work, he is for doing that. If a new program or spending more money is how you accomplish an outcome, he will do that as well.
None of the things he has done should be any surprise to people who paid attention during the election. He is fulfilling campaign promises.
One other thing that is important to know. It is well known that Bush doesn't have any use for the Beltway media. What is less known but equally true is that he also isn't particularly interested in Beltway think tanks, lobbyists, pundits (even if they are conservative) or "power players." He considers them all part of the Washington culture that is all talk and no action, and is out of touch with the majority of the people. Given the behavior of some of the people in this category, I can see how he would hold that view.
Well, President Bush isn't running again, and continued attacks against him will probably not help get conservatives elected. I am not going to waste time defending him because I won't be able to convince people who are of the anti-Bush opinion. Get a candidate that you think will be more to your liking and support him in the primaries. Meanwhile, I will sit here and wonder why the Washington Post has suddenly become so credible.
Same here. It took Harriet Miers to show me that I really didn't know who George W. Bush was.