And maybe that he was talking about that less in term 1 than in term 2? And he had more effect later in his term? Or because something in society was starting to change then? Or that GOP was more in ascendancy? (It wasn’t really until later - but maybe the southern switch was happening).
I’d sort of buy the argument that I’m saying here. Although I’d like to what more. But also I think it needs this greatest context. So I’d be interested to hear it.
Oh. In his 2nd term he routinely said "I have a mandate". Thats why he nominated Bork, he thought he was untouchable then. Like most 2nd terms he became obsessed with legacy. He was going to end communism if it took every penny his grandkids ever had.
But then you have Bush who really wasn’t trying to tear down the government.
He got distracted by Gulf War I so I dont know what he'd have done if Saddam didn't decide the Kuwaiti Gulf ports were worth taking. Reagan desperately wanted to end the Department of Education. No recall on where Bush was on that before Saddam misbehaved.
Where Bush was with Bill Kristol focused on it, who absolutely wanted to end it. But Bush’s pro-government bonafides went way way beyond the military. He just wasn’t a Reagan-type guy. At all.