The Moderate Republican

Even the Conservative Andrew Sullivan...

...supports John Kerry. He endorsed the Democrat today. He made some memorable quotes that pretty much comes close to my views. First, things first he basically says that neither candidate is evil...

"Neither George W. Bush nor John Kerry can be credibly described as "evils." They have their faults, some of which are glaring. They are both second-tier politicians, thrust into the spotlight at a time when we desperately need those in the first circle of talent and vision. But they are not evil. When the papers carry pictures of 50 Iraqi recruits gunned down in a serried row, as Stalin and Hitler did to their enemies, we need have no doubt where the true evil lies. The question before us, first and foremost, is which candidate is best suited to confront this evil in the next four years."

Both sides have engaged in this. Because the two sides offer different visions, we view any vision that doesn't jive with ours evil. Nooooo. I don't like Mr. Bush's views. But I don't think they are evil. Same goes for Mr. Kerry. What happened on September 11th is evil. What is going on in the Sudan is evil. It's time we start distinguishing between what is bad policy and what is truly evil.

Okay, back to Sully. He lists many of the accomplishments of W: his resolve after September 11th being first and foremost. I agree with him on Bush taking down the Taliban, but I still think that Iraq was a bad idea.

He abhors Bush's handling of the prison abuse scandal. He also is amazed at how a Republican has gone down a road that is fiscally irresponsible:

"Domestically, the record is horrifying for a fiscal conservative. Ronald Reagan raised taxes in his first term when he had to; and he didn't have September 11 to contend with. Ronald Reagan also cut domestic spending. Bush has been unable to muster the conservative courage to do either. He has spent like a drunken liberal Democrat. He has failed to grapple with entitlement reform, as he once promised. He has larded up the tax code with endless breaks for corporate special interests; pork has metastasized; and he has tainted the cause of tax relief by concentrating too much of it on the wealthy. He has made the future boomer fiscal crunch far more acute by adding a hugely expensive new Medicare prescription drug entitlement."

It's funny that this President loves to say that he is the heir to Reagan. But as Sully notes, Reagan was willing to raise taxes when necessary. That wasn't an adandoment of his principles; it was learning to compromise when the time called for it. Bush thinks tax cuts are good at any time for any reason. Reagan was willing to bend sometimes and was never considered a traitor for it. Bush thinks that any deviation off course is a grave sin.

Sully then talks about the biggest betrayal of Bush. In 2000, he ran as a "compassionate conservative." He touted a moderate agenda. After the closness of the 2000 election, one would expect that Bush would scale back some of his agenda and be more...well moderate. But of course we know he was not. Sully explains:

"He ran for election as a social moderate. But every single question in domestic social policy has been resolved to favor the hard-core religious right. His proposal to amend the constitution to deny an entire minority equal rights under the law is one of the most extreme, unnecessary, and divisive measures ever proposed in this country. And his response to all criticism--to duck the hardest questions, to reflexively redirect attention to the flaws of his opponents, and to stay within the confines of his own self-reinforcing coterie--has made him singularly unable to adjust, to learn from mistakes, to adapt to a fast-changing world. In peacetime, that's regrettable. In wartime, it's dangerous."

In a time that we are facing an enemy that wants to utterly destroy not only the United States but all free societies, we need someone who can admit to being fallible. Bush believes he was called by God. Great, but even a cursory reading of the Bible shows that even those who God called were fallible. There is only one perfect person, Mr. Bush, and last I checked, you don't have the stigmata.

Sullivan is not crazy about Kerry. He is right that Kerry has a somewhat bland record in the Senate (though he does have a stellar environmental record in my view). On combating terrorism, Sullivan says Kerry can be trusted:

"The convention was a remarkable event in that it pivoted the Democratic Party toward an uncomplicated embrace of the war on terror. Kerry has said again and again that he will not hesitate to defend this country and go on the offensive against Al Qaeda. I see no reason whatsoever why he shouldn't. What is there to gain from failure in this task? He knows that if he lets his guard down and if terrorists strike or succeed anywhere, he runs the risk of discrediting the Democrats as a party of national security for a generation. He has said quite clearly that he will not "cut and run" in Iraq. And the truth is: He cannot. There is no alternative to seeing the war through in Iraq. And Kerry's new mandate and fresh administration will increase the options available to us for winning. He has every incentive to be tough enough but far more leeway to be flexible than the incumbent."

Kerry knows as does many in the Democratic leadership that this is a new day. When I saw the debates and heard Kerry talk about terror, I realized that he does "get it." He knows we have to guard against another attack on American soil. On Iraq, he knows we have to get the job done. He just thinks he can do a better than job the current occupant. And I think he can.

Finally, in the wake of Cheif Justice William Rhenquist's bout with thyroid cancer, we are beset with the question of what kind of justices Bush would pick in a second term. Here's Sullivans view:

"In terms of the Supreme Court, I have far more confidence in Kerry's picks than Bush's. In 2000, Bush promised moderate, able judges; for the last four years, he has often selected rigid, ideological mediocrities. "

Again, right on. I have to place my trust in Kerry as well. Bush has said that his favorite justice is someone like Antonin Scalia, a justice that I know is not friendly to gays. You could see a more conservative court try to get sodomy laws back on the books or find a way to constitutionally strike down the gay marriage laws in Massachusetts or civil unions in Vermont. Mr. Bush likes to talk about liberal activist judges, but you would definitely see some conservative activist judges working hard to curtail gay rights.

Sullivan makes a good case for Kerry. He is not the best, but he's better than what we got. I think Sullivan's weight carries. He picked Clinton in '92 and Bush in 2000. Let's hope he can make it three for three.

Posted by Dennis at October 26, 2004 11:29 PM