Terry(e?), Everbody

Bush on the issues of basic Governance and Foreign Policy is ok by me. What I mean is he is an “Activist Conservative”. In reality he is somewhat more a Teddy Roosevelt type Progressive Republican. He embodies the values of Conservatism which is to say he views America as more the worlds hope and not the worlds problem. He is patriotic and unashamed. For him being right is what is important, principle certainly trumps recognition by a vain and the self-absorbed world. He is optimistic and will certainly carry a big stick if necessary.

I am starting to get the “Compassionate Conservative” thing. Basically it is that government is not bad and if applied properly it will add and not detract from society. It places measurements on the responsiliites of government administration and adds accountiblity. For example, school vouchers (which Ron Silver agrees with) would be available as a choice. The government stops forcing onto people things like tax funded education being run exclusively by the state. Allowing people needing services to choose the means as long as measurably effective, such as turning to religious institutions if that be the individual’s choice is just fine. Those that choose non-religious institutions would have that choice. As long as the public is funding these things why should not all available means of effective help be available? Liberalism fears competition and accountibility, those are conservative principles.

I do not want a third party. It has become apparent to me that religiously inclined people have a tendency to more support such approaches. They are less ashamed of America and generally more willing to be supportive of our Nations best interests. I think I understand now why Irving Kristol, the Godfather of the Neocons, when he says that the innate moralism that is embodied by Social Conservatives make them the most natural allies on issues of War and Peace, our nations interests and putting money where the mouth is on higher causes. For those of us who also have tendencies to moralism from non-religious perspectives (I plead guilty), we simply must make some choices. The typical pro-choice person with non-religious tendencies is not going to inspire a majority coalition that tackles the most important issues of our day now, or any time soon, so the choice is easy for me. September 11th and a special President assured that for me.

Ed Koch said freedom is meaningless if your dead. Fortunately for me I see things even brighter. As I stood at the RNC Convention close enough to give any protester the opportunity to spit upon this President, in truth I would have just loved to give him a hug like the construction worker gave him shortly after 9/11 as explained by Giuliani. This President inspired me way beyond my expectations as I see much more hope in this man then security and the WOT. At the convention I saw a man who sees America in very complex terms, I guess that is what a non-nuanced view does. It allows for clarity of vision. Bush Sr. talked of the vision thing, yet it is his son that has it.

It was expressed at the convention that the evidence of a twilight in the skies does not mean the lack of not night and day. This President sees night and day. I think the following from Dick Morris today in the NY Post expresses pretty well how I feel…

I voted for Gore in 2000, as a true child of the Clinton era. But I decided to vote for Bush on Sept. 12, 2001 when I saw how he handled the threat we face. I used to back Bush because he offered safety; now I support him because he summons us all to an ideal. Before he spoke, supporting Bush was a duty one owed to the fallen. Now, it is an honor.

Amen to that.