Writing Off Republicans: I'm not sure what you're asking. Like I said, I'd give Bush another look if he did some short-top-and-sides work on spending, and I named some of the big offenders, both of commission (farm bill) and omission (social security). The fact that Bush has made some small environmental-policy changes is nice, but I'll admit that this is an issue where he can't really win or lose my vote. Environmental policy is gravy, to be addressed, ideally, after you've figured out how to stop taxing people for short-sighted, poorly managed, and often counterproductive federal programs.

I think I've mentioned before, though, that I can afford to be extremely critical of Bush. With or without my vote, Massachusetts will drop into the (R) column in 2004 about the time that Boston gets a July 4th snow. In a way, I'm one of the lucky ones; I get a cost-free license to vote my conscience, make a protest vote, or simply not vote. My actions don't improve the chances that a Democrat or a Republican will be elected to the presidency, since Massachusetts is a Democrat gimme except in the worst of circumstances (say, Reagan vs. Mondale). That might go some distance to explaining my attitude toward Bush. For me there is no lesser-of-two evils moment, since my state is, essentially, not in play. Thus, the only things that could bring me to vote for Bush are, first, a big turnaround on the size and scope of the government (I'll excuse some pro-lifing and pandering to the Jesus lobby during the election, since it's like complimenting a hostess on her dress -- required, even if her dress is unspeakably ugly); second, as a statement. A statement of what? I dunno. If the election had been in the November immediately following the big September 11th ruckus, I would have voted for Bush -- solidarity, a message to the world, don't change horses, etc. I honestly don't know if there is a message worth sending in '04.