With the exception of this summer's ineffective speeches on corporate malfeasance, Bush has largely ignored domestic issues. To quote the strip Doonesbury from Oct. 18, the administration is so out of touch with the reality of the country that "it's like dogs are in charge" of our executive office. To the credit of numerous Republican lawmakers around the country, they have not become preoccupied with the personal obsession of the man who is supposedly the head of both their government and their party.

The prevailing issues in most congressional and local races around the country have been health care, education, and a host of other idiosyncratic factors, such as the income tax in Tennessee. Furthermore, the media, though it is ever eager to report movements up and down the terrorism color bar, has also continued to cover various domestic issues and elections.

Why, despite numerous signals from the electorate, his fellow politicians and even the media, has Bush chosen to ignore his formerly vaunted domestic agenda in favor of continuing yelping about Iraq? The superficial answer is obvious: he (and the Republican party in general) has always been seen as stronger with regards to issues of national security. Thus, it is to Bush's electoral advantage to keep the focus on these issues.

The second part of this is that Bush's domestic agenda was always weak and largely non-substantive. Had Sept. 11 not happened, chances are that he would have run out of things to talk about a couple of years into his administration. At some point, Saddam would have done something to offend us, and we would have ended up essentially where we are now: at war with Iraq. After all, a president has to do something.

For a long time, I thought that the answer was no more complicated than that. Bush and his advisors simply decided to focus on issues that were not only politically beneficial, but were also more clear cut and easier for a man who admitted his problem with "the vision thing" to understand.

Recently, however, I have begun to believe that there is another reason Bush has been glad to forget about domestic policy for a time. To reference one of my favorite movies, The American President, it's not only that he doesn't get it ­ it's also that Bush can't sell his party's domestic agenda.

I urge everybody to look up the Republican Party platform on which Bush ran for President. The term "zero tolerance" is repeated throughout the document and perfectly describes the tone and feel of their domestic agenda. It is explicitly for privatization of Social Security and education and against unions and a woman's right to choose.

More importantly, many or most of their claims are untrue. For instance, they claim that Republican-governed states have experienced budget surpluses and great prosperity.

The reality, of course, is public debt and, in the case of Tennessee, government shutdown. They also make reference to "our Lock-box" ­ clearly Al Gore's idea. The American public is not stupid. If this agenda was widely publicized, the truth of the Republican domestic agenda would ensure their defeat. Bush is all too happy to deflect attention from the national party and let local leaders say what they need to for the election.