I'm no BushBot, but the distilled argument against him doesn't seem that strong. Just two points.
Argument One: The President is either hamstrung by lack of control of the Senate and/or is exerting a masterful strategy to regain control of both Houses of Congress AND then will enact a conservative agenda.
The alternative would seem to be gridlock playing into Dashole's hand? No compromise, and hence shutdown the government. Not likely a good way to win in 2002.
Argument Two: The President is doing a masterful job of running the Terror War. Who would you rather have in the White House Al Gore or George Bush?
Well, we could be listening to daiy video cuts from Mullah Omar taunting the Great Satan, saying "Give us the evidence of Bin Laden's involvement." We could still have UBL training thousands of terrorists openly in Taliban camps bolstered by their apparent invincibility. We could still have utter chaos and fear.
We could still have Arafat as the recognized peace partner in Palestine.
We could still have even drier farmers in Klamath. We could be members of Kyoto. We could have California Air Resources Board decisions co-opted into federal law. I shudder to thinks what else.
We don't?
The alternative would seem to be gridlock playing into Dashole's hand? No compromise, and hence shutdown the government. Not likely a good way to win in 2002.
Any President who could acheive gridlock in congress and shut down that particular branch of government would get my vote. Congress does it's best work when it does nothing at all
