What is the purpose of posting an out-of-date Steyn column? Most of the points in it are ancient history.
|
Regarding the campaign, Mr. Steyn is wrong. Bush campaigned all summer and fall. The media instituted a news black-out after it became obvious that Gore wasn't going to have a huge resergence.
I am positive about this, because A Citizen Reporter and I documented (along with reports from a lot of freepers) the campaign stops and appearances, with dozens of first-hand reports. Some of those reports are bookmarked on my page under the "Bush/Cheney 2000 Victory Tour" titles. The photos are now mostly gone, but the reports are still there.
I think that one can fault President Bush for not making an effort in New Hampshire, but other than that I think he ran a pretty decent campaign.
As far as Congressional action, President Bush does a lot of behind-the-scenes negotiation. I distinctly remember that approaching his first August vacation in 2001, there was a lot of media hype that nothing was happening. Then the last week before he left for Crawford, a flurry of bills were passed and signed.
So far he's always managed to push them back and score a goal himself...
Slumbers? I'm more inclined to see apparent periods of inactivity as Sisyphean struggles against institutional inertia, where (to mix a metaphor) a lot of paddling is going on beneath the surface.
Is the press heaping dung? Of course. But George's understated style, a huge contrast to the repulsively narcissistic, permanent campaign of the Clinton WH, has proven pretty effective in "scoring goals" despite the s*** splatter. Let's just hope he can score a few more before Nov '04, perhaps winning over a whole bunch of new fans along the way.