"... health care and education. He passed major consensus legislation on both."
Thank you so much for reminding me -- I, for a mere second, began to forget that our president pushed for the largest expansion of an entitlement program since LBJ. The medicare bill was when I began to lose trust in President Bush. PLEASE do not even try to make that a great domestic accomplishement.
As for the tax cuts, I couldn't agree with you more. Tax cuts are good. Traditionally, though, one would expect that, in giving more money back to the people, you would also have to take that money away from somewhere, namely, the government. Instead we saw a 31% increase in domestic discretionary spending. I support the tax cuts. But from this conservative's point of view, such an outrageous increase in government spending eliminates all bragging rights that Bush would have had for the tax cuts.
"There will be an Iraqi government that wants us there, in November."
Maybe true. Regardless, Iraq has, for the Bush administration, been one embarassment after another. It is not a strong campaign issue. He has to push something else. But from what I've been seeing, he has been stubbornly insisting on making terrorism his key campaign issue. I admit that I'm not an expert, but from my perspective, this is a bad decision on his part.
On the domestic stuff, it was politics. He took away their issues, now they don't have them. He delivered tax cuts which were what the economy needed and it predictably responded. There are maybe a quarter of the electorate that are actually pacifist or defeatest, and you can probably win a statewide race in Massachusetts on that platform (probably, not entirely clear even there). But nationally, defeatism and anti-Americanism are big time political losers, no matter how hysterical the media gets.
There is a potential constituency that might not go with Bush over the war, but not for those reasons. Screw the ungrateful wretches, we got rid of Saddam now leave them in their own filth. If some thug wants to turn the shredders back on let 'em, it is about what they deserve. If nutjobs take over the place again, don't futz around with trying to govern them and seperate the nice ones from the mean ones, just nuke the lot of 'em and be done with it. None of it is worth one US Marine.
Not a sentiment I share. But not a pacifist or anti-American sentiment either. That kind of "defeatism" added to the left's kind might make a plurality. And might want to use Kerry to get our guys out. But it is a dangerous thing, because it means putting a half peacenik dove who in power will do whatever the NYT editorial page asks of him, in charge of our policy toward Iranian nuclear weapons. And we know exactly what he will do about those. He will cut them a check and applaud when they lie to him. And even the cynical "get out" crew over Iraq, don't want to see that.
Anybody want to see what President Kerry would do the day after a hit that makes 9-11 look like a Sunday picnic? Anybody want to bet the country on him, if that happens? The man is a spineless pansy. The American people know it. They aren't going to elect him commander in chief, any more than they elected McGovern. All the media hype in the world couldn't elect McGovern and it won't elect his the modern version.