Same as it ever was. The new Bush is pretty much the old Bush with a few more years left on him than his dad. Instead of actually trying to reach out and be a moderate (which means centrist, doesn't it), he just fed us a line about making one country out of divided interests. What he really meant to say was, "Hey, who's in charge here? Shut up, you lost!*"

*Gore and the Democrats didn't actually lose the popular election for President, they lost the ever controversial electoral college vote--thus the ever lingering aster.

Bush*'s first act was to take money away from international groups that sanction (or even make mention) abortions or abortive measures when it comes to pregnancy. This was the policy when Bush Sr. left office (repealed almost immediately by Clinton), and so we're back where we were in the early 90s. And then, when Bush* realized that might free up a great deal of money, he said faith-based organizations that do charitable things should be eligible for federal funding. Bush* apparently doesn't know what the separation of church and state actually means.

Bush* also sent a bunch of stuff for education (not a huge bunch of stuff, because the education mandates have little money attached to them, mostly just hooey about testing students, teachers and janitors more often and if they fail, they lose federal money). Oh yeah, and vouchers. We need to give everyone vouchers so they can use federal money to go to school wherever they want. Even faith-based schools (another clear violation of church and state, but, like I said, I don't think Bush* actually knows what this means) and other private schools.

Vouchers only work if the cost of private school is the same cost as the voucher (they aren't). Otherwise you're just giving another tax cut to parents who already have enough money to send their kids to private school. It doesn't help kids who are on reduced lunches. It doesn't help those whose parents are struggling just to make sure there is food on the table. They have to go to public school no matter how bad the schools get--and they will get worse if the government takes money away from them.

Back in the 80s, there was this mystical thing called Star Wars that didn't have anything to do with the movie (except the name). It was about this wonderful global anti-missile system that would shoot down war heads screaming down on us from the evil empire (the U.S.S.R. for the most part). Just when you thought we were in an unprecedented time of relative peace, Bush* has decided to crank up the War Hawks again.

Developing an anti-missile system is in direct violation of treaties signed with the former U.S.S.R. Bush*'s people (and Bush* himself) have decided that since the world has changed so much in the last few years, the treaty doesn't mean anything anymore, so they're not really violating anything by spending billions on a fantasy that probably won't work. It's almost like the Drug War, the way this thing sucks up money and shows no positive results.

Our biggest security issues are not from volleys of missiles coming at us from any one country. They are the small suicide bombings (U.S.S. Coal), things like the World Trade Center bombing, or the Oklahoma City bombing (just because we're killing the guy convicted for it doesn't mean there aren't other nuts out there like him--already living in our own country!). Electronic attacks on large companies will also rise in the next few years, and having Star Wars in our heads won't stop that either. If we spend billions of dollars making sure no missiles fly through the air at us, missiles will not fly through the air at us at all. They (whoever they are) will figure out ways to circumvent this (just like the drug lords who regularly skip through the borders to continue their business), and we will have spent money on something virtually worthless--except to certain people's peace of mind.

And it's only been a week! The most disturbing thing is that these proposals aren't even new. There is nothing revolutionary happening here, just rehash of the old hash that has been rotting in Republican minds for years.

One strange (but new) proposal came from Phil Gramm this week (created by a lobby of industries who rely on coins for their livelihood--everyone's got a lobby). It seems that Gramm doesn't like the way our change looks. He wants prettier coins so that in 1000 years the people who find our old change won't wonder why the most wonderful society in the world had such plain looking coinage. And he wants to get rid of the penny (again!). Because rich people don't like pennies--pennies remind them of what it's like being poor.

Matt Worley would like to propose legislation to prevent anyone who stuck a hot dog up his ass and ran around a track to get into a fraternity be barred from public service. Of course, this would necessitate a great many special elections to replace current officeholders, but he thinks it's for the best.