A strange defense
Andrew Sullivan doesn't understand why all the liberals have their panties in a wad about Bush's domestic agenda. He says:
Yes, I can see why the left will disagree with Bush on certain issues: judicial restraint, tax cuts, a pro-active, rather than defensive, war on terror. I share concern about rising deficits, a weakening of the church-state divide, and fraying civil liberties. But the domestic record of Bush doesn't begin to justify the hysterical opprobrium thrown at him. Some of it is the system working: the man has gotten precious few judges through the Senate (and some of his picks have been dreadful); his tax cuts have been mercifully restrained by more fiscally prudent Republicans; his (good) proposals to shore up social security are on hold; there will be no drilling in protected Alaska; his faith-based initiative has been watered down to almost nothing.
In other words, by Sullivan's own admission, Bush has a disastrous and shameful agenda, about which the only good thing that can be said is that it's been largely blocked and diluted. It's like saying, "Yes, that man tried to steal your wallet, but we stopped him, so why do you think he's such a bad guy??" Sullivan is not only somehow *praising* Bush for failing to push through horrible domestic policies, he sees this as a sign that there's nothing to worry about! Very odd.