The Navy's investigation into John Kerry's medals...

I had very serious reservations about George Bush in 2000, but I also had them about Al Gore. It was a tough call. In the end, as a centrist, I thought maybe it was time for a change of party after 8 years of Democratic administrations. Governments need to be changed regularly, in my opinion, to keep the country on the road and not swerving steadily to the left or the right.

I hoped that Bush would be closer to the center than Al Gore. I was wrong. The Bush administration took a sharp turn to the right, as though he had some kind of a mandate with only 50% of the vote. And it was a new kind of right. This republican administration increased government spending at 3 times the rate of the Clinton administration. And that's not war costs. The Bush non-military government budget increased at FOUR times that of the Clinton administration. And then, during a period when the market tanked and tax revenues decreased AND while an expensive and avoidable foreign war was going on--he irresponsibly cut government revenues producing an unprecedented budget deficit of a Trillion dollars. This is not the conservative republican party of Reagan. This is a radical, right-wing party that is saddling America with a record National Debt that will lead to inflation and reduced Social Security benefits for young Americans, according to Alan Greenspan, who ought to know, if anybody does.

In truth, I really don't give much of a rats ass about Bush's Champaign tour of the National Guard. I put that up just to show how petty and inappropriate the mudslinging against Kerry has become. The fact is, we have no idea if Kerrys combat service would make him a better President or not. I had no idea if Bush's non-combat record would make him a worse President or not in 2000. But now I have four years of Bush's conduct as President to judge him by. And it ain't pretty.

Unprecedented national debt, an expensive avoidable war, increased government size, tax breaks for the wealthy, budget deficits, environmental lethargy, fewer allies, more enemies, a stagnant economy, fewer jobs for Americans, and a bitterly divided country.

I voted for him in 2000 basically because he was easygoing and likable and talked tough. That's just not enough for me anymore. I expected some smarter policies and I have been gravely disappointed.

I want a change.

 

Well, . . . yes. The perpetrators of the first WTC bombing were captured and prosecuted. The Millenium Bombing Plot which was a Al Qaida operation on a 9/11 scale was uncovered and prevented. Clinton tried to kill Osama bin Laden twice with cruise missile strikes in Afghanistan in retaliation for the USS Cole and embassy bombings. Didn't kill him, but it was worth a try and it didn't cost any American lives and very little money. Clinton unleashed the CIA with orders to eliminate bin Laden, they didn't manage it, but the President was taking prudent action.

Richard Clark testified to the 9/11 commission that a whole range of anti-Al Qaida activites were underway in the Clinton administration, most of which were stopped abruptly by the Bush administration who was only concerned with Saddam until 9/11. And mostly with Saddam since then.

Meanwhile Osama walks free, somewhere in Pakistan.

By God, I hear you Sourdough! Kerry wasn't my first choice for President either, but the primaries are rigged so that only the Iowa and New Hampshire winners ever get past March. I was a General Clark supporter, but Louisiana never gets a vote that matters. I defend Kerry's military record because he served honorably and I think it's disgraceful to disrespect a veteran in that fashion just because you don't like his politics. Kerry is to the left of what I'm looking for but he's the only alternative to another four years of George II.

I didn't vote for Gore in 2000 because I thought he was a pussy. And look what it got me. My revised 2004 criteria is to elect the most brainpower available. A clever President can find ways to compensate for his shortcomings.

 

I would if I could. George Will is the only conservative columnist with balance, brainpower and keen perception. He is an old-school conservative, much more to the center than the neo-cons in power. He is deeply suspicious and mildly critical of the Iraq War.

George Will and Maureen Dowd are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, but they are clearly the smartest, wittiest, most articulate, and policially savvy writers out there.