Replies

George W Bush is quite possibly the BEST (sorry, Ms. Press Corps, not worst) president in most of our lifetimes (and NO, LBJ was the worst president since the Civil War!). Sure, he has his shortcomings, but he has become very learned in foreign affairs and takes national security as a deadly serious priority. Neither of these two paramount qualities was a hallmark of his predecessor, or, for that matter, exists in most any quarters of the Democratic Party.

The Founding Fathers used the veto very infrequently in their Presidencies, and Bush hasn't vetoed a Act of Congress yet. He appears content to allow the Congress to legislate as it wishes with regard to domestic affairs, so long as it passes a few White House priorities. His reluctance to veto legislation probably explains his signatures on the grant to the airlines, the campaign-finance reform law (which, lest we forget, impedes the fundraising activites of DEMOCRATS more than those of Republicans), and the abominable farm bill (which he should have VETOED more than anything else as fiscally reckless).

After the terrorist tragedy in New York, Arlington, and Somerset County, defense and security have trumped all other concerns. When these dastardly terrorists struck our embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, the embattled President Clinton aimed a multi-million-dollar cruise missile at "a $10 empty tent to strike a camel in the butt" and errantly (?) bombed a Sudanese pharmaceutical plant. Because he did nothing more to retalliate after his domestic adversaries did not relent in their drive to impeach him (and make a President Al Gore [barf!!]), he proved that he was never serious by failing to mobilize the nation and defeat the al-Qaida terrorist organization. I believe that the American people now KNOW deeply how the Clintons and Democrats betrayed them. Although Bush's worrisome initiatives to limit civil liberties in the Patriot act have caused much consternation in some circles (and not enough elsewhere), at least he's TRYING--and trying hard every day of his Presidency--to fight terrorism. And it's obvious--he's winning.

But he needs to do more to commandeer the Congress to quit the balloning pork budget. In the absence of a line-item veto, I'd propose a new appropriations bill, say "Corporate Welfare and Political Pork." The President would veto any other appropriations bill which contains corporate welfare and political pork provisions. The welfare/pork bill would always get the veto unless it gets down to $0. Perhaps now's the time to force a showdown on this issue...or, better yet, wait until the Democratic primary. That'll leave...The Rev. Al Sharpton.

No Republican is seeking the nomination for the Presidency in 2004, although I expect Bush to run again and win. At the end of his presidency, look out for Pres. Rice. (What will Democrats say then?)