[rdb3]

I read it. I agree with it. But it's not applicable to G.W. Bush.

He ain't his father.

Tell ya what. Let's wait and see the results of the November election. If the GOP regains the Senate and keeps the House, my guess is that you will see a rightward tilt.

We shall see, right? If this does not occur, then will the criticisms prove correct (and I will compare/contrast Dubya's actions with those of Reagan when he had the other party in power). I am man enough to say admit as much.

Deal?

[Mortimer Snavely]

I will have to add this caveat: if Republicans who aggressively and articulately confront and refute the liberal-socialist axis are elected, I will breathe easier and be glad that I was wrong. There are very few indeed with that temperment. Most want to make friends with those who want to eat us for dinner, and have us do the cooking besides. This is poor enemy identification, to say the least.

Being a know-it-all, PIA, cranky curmudgeon who talks like he eats a dictionary for breakfast every morning is a big part of the solution. Having great PR skills, looking good on TeeVee, and being fun at parties is a big part of the problem. This sort of conciliatory and unconditionally supportive personality pattern validates and enables our worst enemies. Calling a sadistic schemer with diabolical cunning exactly that is a minimum requirement for progress. Confrontation, not conciliation, is the order of the day, or should be.