Just a few comments on some of the recent dialog and that article:
Yes, Bush has absolutely strayed far from many traditional conservative views that he preached when trying to get into that office. The biggest area where this has manifested itself is in his spending. The Bush administration is spending us into oblivion, just like a Democratic president. The root of this problem is the fact that, just like any good politician, Bush has decided to prostitute the American taxpayers to get himself reelected. A prime example of this is that prescription drug benefit. This bill was a completely careless blanket piece of legislation aimed solely to capture that evergroing elderly vote...an appeal to their apparent sense of entitlement. Yes, I will admit that there are many elderly that need assistance with their medication...don't they call that Medicare? Regardless, this bill gives every elderly member of society access to this benefit, regardless of his or her financial status....UTTERLY CARELESS PANDERING!!!!
As others have stated, I may presently support Bush for reelection, but it's not a blanket support. If you gave me a valid candidate who is tough on defense and fiscally conservative (like JFK), I'd be the first in line to vote for him/her. The problem is that the Democratic party has gone so far left of it's original roots that it's alienated those of us moderates that once counted themselves in the ranks of the libs.
Along the above line of reasoning, those from both sides of the fence should consider reading Zell Miller's book - A National Party No More: The Conscience of a Conservative Democrat. If you put aside the Democratic Party line about Miller being a Republican in disguise, you'll read some interesting things. In his book, you will see admiration for the likes of JFK and Clinton, presidents that he views as true old-school democrats. You'll also see what you can find when you pull back the curtains on a political party. Both parties are to some degree in the pocket of outside groups. Miller gives you a glimpse of how that influence manifests itself.
While I'm being a literary promoter, you guys should consider reading a book by John Stossel - Give Me a Break: How I Exposed Hucksters, Cheats and Scam Artists and Became the Scourge of the Liberal Media. It's a great book about many different issues and the role the media plays in those problems. He has been pigeonholed by his peers because he has dared to examine the way that the media often makes things worse. Regardless, it's a worthy read for both liberal and conservative alike. The only problem is that it really shows you how absolutely screwed up things are and how little we can do to fix it.
OK, back on topic....."Kerry insists that he is a fiscal conservative, aiming to reduce the deficit by tax increases". This alone proves that Kerry doesn't have a clue about fiscal conservatism. Fiscal conservatives realize that the government does not create wealth and prosperity. The role of government is to protect us as a nation and to protect the rights and liberties of individuals. Anything beyond that is beyond the scope of the federal government. When you take that view of government, you see that our government is a spending menace, which is beyond out of control. The only way to cure this is to cut both taxes and spending simultaneously. To do so, we need a politician with the balls to truly stir up the system with real reform in mind. Unfortunately, I don't see anyone out there in the political arena that fits that bill....and I'm not holding my breath for it (jaded, but realistic).
Kerry can talk a good game about conservative spending, but his record does not indicate this type of philosophy. Kerry is part of this bloated government animal that views the government as the all-knowing all-important vessel charged with saving the American people from having to take any semblance of responsibility for their own lives.
So, in the end, we have a Republican president that has no clue about true fiscal conservatism, but is quite willing to take on that primary government function of protecting the American people. On the other side, we have a Democratic challenger that melds his platform to fit the views of his audience....a challenger that is so concerned with international opinion that he is willing to cow-tow to a international body that serves it's own interests and not those of the United States....a challenger that is vocal about his belief that government is the solution to all problems...a challenger that wants to increase taxes.
Come Election Day, I may think Bush is a moron politician, but he is the better of two evils, because he is going to continue to stay on the offensive in this war on terror. Kerry wants to continue with a more defensive approach, which may sound good.....at least until the next terrorist attack that levels a US city and kill millions of Americans. This is not a time for an American president that wants to return to the status quo. We did that in the late 90's and then got kicked in the balls on 9/11.
Man, I can't post a short response, can I? I guess I just get going when I see a chance to vent.