I'm The Sidekick John McCain
Filed by: Monica Roberts
October 31, 2008 10:00 AM

http://www.bilerico.com/2008/10/im_the_sidekick_john_mccain.php

It's been a while since I've done a song rewrite for you Projectors!

wiz of oz_scarecrow.jpgGot inspired to do one for you after hearing Republicans attack Barack's Harvard education and pondered how hypocritical that was.

So now, just in time for Election 2008, sung to the tune of the Wizard of Oz's 'If I Only Had a Brain' is my salute to the GOP presidential nominee.

Quote from: Zythyra on October 31, 2008, 01:27:50 PM
I'm The Sidekick John McCain
Filed by: Monica Roberts
October 31, 2008 10:00 AM

http://www.bilerico.com/2008/10/im_the_sidekick_john_mccain.php

It's been a while since I've done a song rewrite for you Projectors!

wiz of oz_scarecrow.jpgGot inspired to do one for you after hearing Republicans attack Barack's Harvard education and pondered how hypocritical that was.

So now, just in time for Election 2008, sung to the tune of the Wizard of Oz's 'If I Only Had a Brain' is my salute to the GOP presidential nominee.

What happened to civility and courtesy in this country?

Validate "If only I had a brain". Is that because you disagree with him that he lacks a brain? Or is it a general rule that only Democrats have the power to think?

I did not listen to the song, so I won't comment on that...only what you stated. Republicans attacked Obama. Big deal. It's an election year and that is common for both parties. I'm not defending them. Nor am I writing this to advocate John McCain's presidency, or for any particular political viewpoint. I am advocating objectivity.

Obama graduated from Harvard, true, a very impressive achievement and one I have never accomplished. I never went to college at all in fact. John McCain graduated from the United States Naval Academy, serving twenty years as a Naval officer. He was shot down over Vietnam in 1969, was severely injured landing in a rice paddy, and then tortured after his capture. When in the Hanoi Hilton, being an Admiral's son, he was offered to be released which he refused; abiding by the Code of Conduct all of us in the military are taught and not accepting special treatment. He was tortured more because of his decision, the misformed face and arm attest to his injuries, and spent 5 1/2 years as a prisoner of war, being released with everyone else in 1975. After retiring from the Navy in 1980, he ran for congress and has spent the next 28 years there as one of the most prolific statemen of this era.

Does this qualify him for the Presidency or your vote? That's up to you, and it isn't the point. It does qualify him for your respect and gratitude. And I think maybe that qualifies him for a brain, whether or not it thinks differently than you.

I'm the only one who can determine who I should respect.

Anyway, you don't see the irony in them attacking Obama for having an education? Why would they have to attack someone's education? Is it because they FEAR education? Is it because they DISDAIN education?

I respected McCain in 2000, but not now. Not after giving in on the torture issue. Not after rolling in the same muck as the intolerant base of his party. Not after resorting to a name calling campaign rather than a true discussion of issues.

I'm not so sure that McCain is one of the most prolific statesmen of his generation. I'm not even certain he qualifies as a statesman at all.

Well Obama was at the top of his class, and McCain at the bottom of his.  I think the two schools attract about equally skilled people, so I would assume that had it been reversed, McCain would have gone through Harvard like Bush went through Yale, and Obama would have been at the top of his class at the Navel Academy.  Though he did not use the "Admirals Son" deal in Hanoi, he sure used it the rest of his life.  That crash in NVN was not his first, and any other aviator would have washed out with a record like his.  Having a dad, and a grand-dad too who were Admirals it ain't that hard to get into the Navel Academy, working his way to become the first black to be editor of the Harvard law review was huge.

It's a real bit of diminished expectations in a nation that elected generals like Washington, Harrison, Grant and Ike to that office, that somehow crashing an airplane is placed on the same level as say - planning and executing the invasion of Nazi Europe. 

I'm sorry, though his service is admired.  Though his sacrifice is noted as heroic, in an of itself is not a command qualification.  Not even close.

Where did the civility go?  Well, first of all I don't think it was there ever.  Well, Washington got a pass, but from Adams on Presidential elections in the United States have been among the vicious political actions ever recorded.  Adams, the grand old man of the Revolution, was accused of being a "Royalist."  Thomas Jefferson was accused of being the AntiChrist (as has Obama on sites like the Free Republic).  From "Ma, ma, where's my Pa?  Gone to the White House Ha Ha Ha" to "In your guts you know he's nuts" for Goldwater through my personal favorite, "Don't change Dicks in the middle of a screw, Vote for Nixon in '72".  Its a very dirty business because that's a lot of power and a lot of money on the line.  Humans will do almost anything for either one of those.  Put them together and they seem to bring out the worst in everyone.


as one of the most prolific statemen of this era - is a bit of an overstatement.  OK, a huge overstatement.

Quote from: tekla on November 04, 2008, 06:32:50 PM
Well Obama was at the top of his class, and McCain at the bottom of his.  I think the two schools attract about equally skilled people, so I would assume that had it been reversed, McCain would have gone through Harvard like Bush went through Yale, and Obama would have been at the top of his class at the Navel Academy.  Though he did not use the "Admirals Son" deal in Hanoi, he sure used it the rest of his life.  That crash in NVN was not his first, and any other aviator would have washed out with a record like his.  Having a dad, and a grand-dad too who were Admirals it ain't that hard to get into the Navel Academy, working his way to become the first black to be editor of the Harvard law review was huge.

It's a real bit of diminished expectations in a nation that elected generals like Washington, Harrison, Grant and Ike to that office, that somehow crashing an airplane is placed on the same level as say - planning and executing the invasion of Nazi Europe. 

I'm sorry, though his service is admired.  Though his sacrifice is noted as heroic, in an of itself is not a command qualification.  Not even close.

Where did the civility go?  Well, first of all I don't think it was there ever.  Well, Washington got a pass, but from Adams on Presidential elections in the United States have been among the vicious political actions ever recorded.  Adams, the grand old man of the Revolution, was accused of being a "Royalist."  Thomas Jefferson was accused of being the AntiChrist (as has Obama on sites like the Free Republic).  From "Ma, ma, where's my Pa?  Gone to the White House Ha Ha Ha" to "In your guts you know he's nuts" for Goldwater through my personal favorite, "Don't change Dicks in the middle of a screw, Vote for Nixon in '72".  Its a very dirty business because that's a lot of power and a lot of money on the line.  Humans will do almost anything for either one of those.  Put them together and they seem to bring out the worst in everyone.


as one of the most prolific statemen of this era - is a bit of an overstatement.  OK, a huge overstatement.

"...McCain was at the bottom of his." -->True. But that is irrelevant for the case argument. You are missing the point. I never went to college, but I still consider my self educated because I educated myself. I did not need to go to college to read Kant, learn Latin, study the Byzantine Commonwealth, or learn quantum mechanics. I did that on my own. Screw fancy degrees, I for one don't need one, and am content with my career. Success in formal education has far more to do with discipline than intelligence...which is what makes a degree worth something, it is not an indication of smartness.

"That crash in NVN was not his first, and any other aviator would have washed out with a record like his." -->Huh? prove it. Have you ever flown jets from an aircraft carrier? Ever controlled a machine moving faster than the speed of sound? Another armchair general making a cheap shot. What does this have to do with respect or running for president for that matter, anyways?

"Having a dad, and a grand-dad too who were Admirals it ain't hard to get into the Navel (sic) Academy..." -->No kidding Sherlock. Tell me another way the world works and I'll give you a candybar. The point is, being priviledged as he was during the Vietnam War, he could simply have gone to any University he wanted and not gone to Vietnam. The arguement here is not who has the bigger brain...that is subjective.

"It's a real bit of diminished expectations in a nation that elected generals like Washington, Harrison, Grant and Ike to that office, that somehow crashing an airplane is placed on the same level as say - planning and executing the invasion of Nazi Europe." -->I could talk all day long on that subject, because I agree with you...I never said it qualified him to be president. I said it qualified him for a measure respect, severely lacking from so many people who simply disagree, of his service to our country. And by the way, as much as I am a fan of General Grant, President Grant was the most imcompetant President we ever had. Military experience is no qualification to the highest office. If there were qualifications, it is in his more than two decade record in Congress, which we obviously disagree on...but as I said that was not the argument and irrelevant.

"I'm sorry, though his service is admired.  Though his sacrifice is noted as heroic, in an of itself is not a command qualification.  Not even close."--> No kidding. Did you actually read what I had said, or did you only read what you wanted to? Let me paraphrase myself again: "does it make him qualified for President and my vote? That's up for the voter to decide. It does qualify him your respect and gratitude. And, I think, it does qualify him for a brain."

"Where did the civility go?  Well, first of all I don't think it was there ever."--> Political Machiavellian politics aside, did you ever have civility?

"Well, Washington got a pass,"-->Sure. But he actually had to win the war first, which was mostly a losing war until the French and Yorktown, and first had to keep the new republic and the army from collapsing dozens of times, then he got a free pass.

"...but from Adams on Presidential elections in the United States have been among the vicious political actions ever recorded."-->You should read other than American history, and you will redefine "vicious". Ever heard of Caeser? Machiavelli? That played a common theme for almost two thousand years of world politics.

"Adams, the grand old man of the Revolution, was accused of being a "Royalist." "--> That's because Adams acted like a royalist, and even bravely defended the British officer in charge of the Boston massacre prior to the revolution...Royalist handle deserved or not, Adams was not a likeable fellow. But he was an able president in his time. 

"Thomas Jefferson was accused of being the AntiChrist..."--> Yes, but years later during the Great Revivial after his death in 1827.

"(as has Obama on sites like the Free Republic)."--> Do not mistake me for the "Free Republic", whoever they are. As you can see, my whole arguement is for mutual respect, not compliance. I don't care what the "Free Republic" does or says, nor should any other thinking American anymore than Jeremiah Rice(sp?). "Free Republic" and their ilk, on the left or right, will remain at the fringes and have no danger to the whole. The Nazi movement in the US and its demise before WWII proved that.

"From "Ma, ma, where's my Pa?  Gone to the White House Ha Ha Ha" to "In your guts you know he's nuts" for Goldwater through my personal favorite, "Don't change Dicks in the middle of a screw, Vote for Nixon in '72" "-->huh? Why listen to them and give them power? By civility I am referring to each other, not politicians and pundits and lobbyists. Be responsible for your self. The lack of civility in modern society (amongst each other) came with the age of information, everyone has an opinion. My point is do your own thinking, and respect the other's opinion...regardless of what others do.

"Its a very dirty business because that's a lot of power and a lot of money on the line.  Humans will do almost anything for either one of those.  Put them together and they seem to bring out the worst in everyone."--> Not true. That is the whole basis of my argument...just because someone else is dirty, and believes the ends justify the means, does that give you license to be dirty back to them? I know I have the intellectual capacity to accomplish alot in life, including obtaining power and money if I focus all my efforts towards that goal. I already have read of Caligula and know the statement about absolute power, etc...others who obtained both in history have subsequantly proven that untrue. Marcus Aurelius, my nom de quill for this sight, comes to mind. But it fills no need in me. My need is fulfilled by what I do for a living and the way I live my life. Many humans will do such a thing for power and money, but not all of them.

" "as one of the most prolific statemen of this era" - is a bit of an overstatement.  OK, a huge overstatement." Perhaps, but it is my opinion. But my opinion is something I've thought about very deeply. Read history and tell me that Henry Clay or Daniel Webster in 1850 were not the most prolific statesman of theirs...and then get back to me on that one. The only ones who can truly answer if McCain was a positive force in the politics of the late 20th/early 21st century, they have not been born yet.

And, for the record, I voted for Obama.




Posted on: November 04, 2008, 10:49:43 pm

---

Quote from: Rebis on November 04, 2008, 05:10:44 PM
I'm the only one who can determine who I should respect.

Anyway, you don't see the irony in them attacking Obama for having an education? Why would they have to attack someone's education? Is it because they FEAR education? Is it because they DISDAIN education?

I respected McCain in 2000, but not now. Not after giving in on the torture issue. Not after rolling in the same muck as the intolerant base of his party. Not after resorting to a name calling campaign rather than a true discussion of issues.

I'm not so sure that McCain is one of the most prolific statesmen of his generation. I'm not even certain he qualifies as a statesman at all.

"I'm the only one who can determine who I should respect." -->I agree, but if that doesn't earn your respect, then I certainly won't earn it either. So why answer me in the first place?

I answered you in order to declare my independence as a person who does not follow the usual expectations. I understand that you may have respect for someone, but you should understand that everyone is different in feelings and conclusions.

I don't believe in nations
I don't believe in flags
I am independent and will not follow someone's command that I show respect where I feel there is none earned.

Anyway. After the rotten campaign, McCain finally showed some graciousness in his concession speach.

I don't see why you're nitpicking Tekla's post.  From what I heard, McCain got stuck in Vietnam because he didn't follow protocol. His jet was targeted, he knew it, and the protocol demanded that he turn and go back. Instead, he went ahead and ended up in prison.


Tekla,
   You forgot to mention that genocidal idiot Andrew Jackson as military to president. God I hate that guy.
    Ike was cool, though, and Grant, but I wish Grant was a better president.

I don't have the usual expectations either, and am quite independent myself, otherwise I wouldn't be a visitor on this website.

I won't try to pick at your trilogy of beliefs, as I differ greatly yet concede at the same time...it is more complicated for me.

I nit-picked at Tekla's post because she challenged me to defend mine. I like mental challenge, not for the sake of discord (which I abhore) but because is healthy for me and forces me to rethink my own strong beliefs. And, occasionally, I come face to face with a long cherished dogma, and have to admit I am wrong. That is why I like to discuss such things with people who are diametrically opposed to my own world view...I understand and respect difference of opinion, and for me it is a tremendous growing experience. I wish others would do the same.

Not following protocol? Haven't heard that one, but being a young man in a combat zone, and making a mistake, he remains in good company; myself humbly included.

And last note, it was my respect for McCain that led me to not vote for him. Argument aside, I agree politics is a dirty game and the President is the primary target. Obama, while less experienced, I think can bring this country closer together which is of primary importance to me...even though I disagree with many of his views. McCain, for his long service, it is time to step aside and retire with dignity. He would not be a successful president. It was for the same reason I was glad Colin Powell left politics in 2004...and the same point I wanted to make about Grant (he was just too nice a guy, and let people take advantage of him...he wasn't suited to be president.)

So for both Rebis and Tekla, nothing personal and thanks for a good challenge.

I make note that Obama shouldered the brunt of an onslought of demeaning slurs and accusations during this contest. Yet he returned none. As a candidate with more experience, McCain has had his share of run ins with famous characters as well, yet the Obama campaign failed to bring them up... not even once.

Why?  He won without them.  He stepped on fewer toes.  He pissed off a lot fewer people. His acceptance speech was gracious and accepting while allowing for the fact that he would need to "earn" support from those who did not vote for him. He's going to need to work with Republicans next year.

He's just aced the first test of Let's be a President 101.

Cindi

Yes, it certainly appeared that way. But that can be decieving. As you have noticed, I myself did not critize Obama at all, because I didn't want that to be the argument...the argument was the blanket villification of McCain, which I felt was undeserved, and everyone here seems to agree without question...and being a member of the military, I took up that banner briefly.

Yes, McCain did run a negetive campaign, and Obama did not...but we are all old enough and politically savvy enough to know there were other things at play here. Obama understood the mood of American voter, and played his hand very well. Look at his brutal record of "assassinating" political rivals in his own party in Chicago, the man certainly has what it takes to reach the top and tough it out.

I for one am looking forward to change, too. Nor can I deny the historical importance of having our first black president, which is exciting for me as it is for alot of other people. He will also be my Commander-in-Chief until I retire in 2011, and that has true meaning to me as it did for Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II.

But wearing rose colored glasses...never. If the emperor turns out to be butt-ass naked, I will not hesitate to say he has no clothes, Chosen One or not.

Success in formal education has far more to do with discipline than intelligence

True that, but then again, doesn't success in almost everything depend on at least as much discipline as intelligence?  And, is not that overt mastering of the self discipline part of what makes good leadership? 

When the smoke clears, and this election is tossed upstairs to people how study elections two things will be very, very clear.  Obama ran what is going to be long considered a textbook race, mastering all elements, the ground game, the volunteers, the organization and the control of the message.  McCain is going to be remembered for just the opposite.  His staff sucked.  His message was all over the place, when he had one, and when his VP wasn't off the reservation.  His organization was almost non-existent, and based, as best as I can tell, on a fifty state strategy of 'no one is going to vote for a negro.' 

So, in agreeing with what you said, and as someone with all those degrees and all, I concur that its all about the discipline.  But, when its all said and done, discipline will usually beat out intelligence anyway.

I said it qualified him for a measure respect, severely lacking from so many people who simply disagree, of his service to our country
If this is true, and I think it is, was not the same due to Gore and Kerry?  Was their service also not worthy of a measure of respect that neither of them got?  Or, how about the last Annapolis grad, who graduated at the top of his class, in nuclear engineering no less.  Wasn't Jimmy Carter also due that?  And if your looking for a starting point in all this lack of 'civility and courtesy' - I'd suggest that you start with the beginnings of the right wing smear machine back when Carter was president.  But, the student protests in the 60s were not civil, and really, nor was the 'daisy ad.' 

And by the way, as much as I am a fan of General Grant, President Grant was the most Incompetent President we ever had. Military experience is no qualification to the highest office.

I don't even think Grant was the worst, or most incompetent - matter of fact, I think that's going to go to Bush II, with no one even in second place.  But, I also think that you have to make a pretty clear line of demarcation between the modern (20th Century and beyond) Presidents, starting with Teddy, and those that came before.  Those older Presidents were president in an entirely different way, governing a very different government.  Poor Grant, like most people, it wasn't his opposition that did him in, it was his 'friends.'  Much like Warren G. Harding. 

One the other hand, if the job of President is to be the chief executive then I think I can make a pretty good argument that fewer were better at that job then Ike was.  And his administrative ability, to organize, to move it along, and to surround himself with the best people, were all a direct reflection of his military training and experience.  I would hope the Obama people study the Ike Administration long and hard as they head into this transition period.  It would be hard to find a better example to use as a model. 

And, we have not even mentioned - though it is I that is remiss in this - Andrew Jackson.  But old Andy would take a long time to talk through.  But, again, civility and courtesy were pretty hard to find during his Administration also.

The lack of civility in modern society (amongst each other) came with the age of information
In fact, a lot of people think that the lack of civility in modern society was a direct result of modern society per se.  That indeed, a sea level change in civility and courtesy were part of modernization.  I think that the 'information age' (and this all depends on where you start it) has given us an erasing of the older notions of 'public' and 'private' and we often know way too much information about people that we really don't need to know.  I wonder if anyone, Lincoln, Jackson, Jefferson, and even Washington would have survived such a personal accounting.  I doubt it.

My need is fulfilled by what I do for a living and the way I live my life
I agree, and follow that in my own life.  However, I do know that the Scum Also Rises, as they say.  And when you have a lot of power and money on the line, the people who line up to get in on it are going to include some pretty shady types.  Ask Grant.  Of course for decent people like you - or me on my better days - we're not even interested in it, so we ain't even in line. 

That line has a pretty good selection of power hungry scoundrels, Carpetbaggers, and Scallywags.  They lust for what you don't care much about.  They are not good people. 

Our system is designed to try to mitigate some of that.  Our Founding Fathers, understood that all too well, and tried to prevent - or at least circumscribe - some of that.  There would not be sections of the Constitution that deal with impeachment and removal from office if they thought everyone was going to be awesome.

In fact, a large part of that "We the People" stuff trusted the real power - as we've just seen - to the people who don't lust for it.  Who live their live, make their dream, to be decent and honest people, who only seek Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, and not power, glory, fame or fortune. 

It was Madison, who wrote the Constitution who taught us that "The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted."

It is my sincere hope and prayer that we now enter a new era.  That the stupid stuff, that red and blue crap is behind us.  That we've taken a huge step away from the racism that has hurt us as a nation, and that we work together to solve the problems that really are no longer either liberal or conservative.

I thought McCain's concession speech was the best speech he gave in the entire campaign.  It was the best concession speech I've ever heard.

I urge all Americans ... I urge all Americans who supported me to join me in not just congratulating him, but offering our next president our good will and earnest effort to find ways to come together to find the necessary compromises to bridge our differences and help restore our prosperity, defend our security in a dangerous world, and leave our children and grandchildren a stronger, better country than we inherited.

Whatever our differences, we are fellow Americans. And please believe me when I say no association has ever meant more to me than that.

I would hope his supporters really take that to heart.  And I would also hope that the Obama people remember what he said last night.

If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.

It's the answer told by lines that stretched around schools and churches in numbers this nation has never seen, by people who waited three hours and four hours, many for the first time in their lives, because they believed that this time must be different, that their voices could be that difference.

It's the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled. Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of red states and blue states.

We are, and always will be, the United States of America.


Its long past the time we get over what divides us, and remember what it is that unites us.

Quote from: Aurelius on November 04, 2008, 11:12:40 PM
So for both Rebis and Tekla, nothing personal and thanks for a good challenge.

No problem. I hope I didn't sound touchy. I was typing fast and may not have been as smooth as I could of been.

It's good to be challenged, unless it's by a grizzly bear the size of a tree.

Posted on: November 05, 2008, 01:21:16 pm

---

Quote from: Cindi Jones on November 05, 2008, 02:33:41 AM
I make note that Obama shouldered the brunt of an onslought of demeaning slurs and accusations during this contest. Yet he returned none. As a candidate with more experience, McCain has had his share of run ins with famous characters as well, yet the Obama campaign failed to bring them up... not even once.

Why?  He won without them.  He stepped on fewer toes.  He pissed off a lot fewer people. His acceptance speech was gracious and accepting while allowing for the fact that he would need to "earn" support from those who did not vote for him. He's going to need to work with Republicans next year.

He's just aced the first test of Let's be a President 101.

Cindi

I read some stuff where the people who were being slurred along with Obama each had to deal with it in their own way.  Ayers chose to stay quiet which I think worked well. Wright made the mistake of responding, and I don't know what that other guy did.  They all live near each other. I thought that was funny. Like you can't meet a neighbor without becoming a terrorist.

Posted on: November 05, 2008, 01:24:00 pm

---

McCain's concession speech really was good. I was aggravated by his previous behavior this year because I actually gave money to McCain's 2000 campaign.

Yes Tekla, I think we are very much in agreement. But we just have different ways of saying and expressing it. But you also seem to carry on an argument of "McCain v. Obama"...that was never my argument. I never said McCain was better or Obama was worse on any grounds. Those opinions, whatever they are, remain with myself.

The civility question...some of us retain ideals, rightly or wrongly, because it may not be "how things are", but "how we want them to be". Civility has never truly been a reality, but it is something that does exist and we should strive to exercise it despite temptation to do otherwise. When civility ended or the age of information began is complex and moot, as there is no right answer...but we can all agree and disagree without showing contempt for the other side. Contempt for difference of opinion is what angers me, regardless which side it comes from. I did not like McCain's campaign, but as his concession speech shows, it was not a reflection of how he really felt and his true character. He is 72 and has no more shots at the White House. Retire with dignity, a reason I did not vote for him.

I am, and have always been, in 100% agreement about Grant. Even as a general, he was called "the butcher" by northerners and southerners alike because they did not understand his genius...he wasn't trying to maneuver to take Richmond, he was trying to destroy Lee's army, which was the South's ability to fight...and that required relentless attack and long casualty rolls. As president, he did not pick good people, but friends. He trusted the wrong people despite evidence to the contrary. He was a nice guy who was not suited to be president. Colin Powell (I am not comparing abilities, only similiar experience), thank God, left politics with his considerable honor intact.

Kerry, Carter, Gore and the rest? Yes I know. You mention them because they are democrats, and seem to assume that is important to me for some reason. I make no reference to Democrat or Republican but too many people do. They fall into the same category. I was disgusted four years go with the whole swift boat thing, and thought it a disgraceful slander. But that was four years ago and I was referring to now. Can we not refrain from tit-for-tat? I do highly respect Carter, but of Kerry I'm still ambivelent seeing what he did in the early seventies; he was never President anyways so I have no issue with him.

I disagree about Bush II. I respect your opinion, which has alot of merit, but there are two reasons I refrain giving the title "worst president" just yet 1) A President's policies and his influence will be felt for decades. Often his true legacy won't be felt for at least a generation. Whether good, bad, or just the usual combination of both...we need historical perspective before we can say that. 2) As an extremely unpopular President (I think now 25%) how can we say with any objectivity? No matter what he does, it will be wrong in the eyes of the American people. Passions need to cool. The media needs to turn their attention on something else. A generation that did not live under Bush needs to decide, and can only do so without prejudice.
Remember, Abraham Lincoln (no, I'm not comparing the two) was the most unpopular in history (excepting maybe Andrew Johnson), half the country split away, with the Northern Press, Copperheads, legions of political office seakers, political generals, and tens of thousands of mothers of sons killed under incompetent officers were at his throat. He trampled on the Constitution without a second thought. But he bore it all knowing what was really at stake, and history proved him right. His popularity rose with the victories of late 64, in time for election, and after that he was martyred so we can never know how it would have turned out, only what he intended to do. But do NOT think I am saying I believe history will prove Bush right, only to give some perspective....popularity and competance are two different things.

In any case, the United States stands firm today, and the red/blue state idiocy I hope becomes extinct, and we can all look forward to a better tomorrow, that's what its all about anyways, right?