Surely no one is shocked by this. It's precisely what I was addressing, in a round-about way, with my post here last night, and what Kari addressed in his post earlier today.

Well, here's unity for you:

LITTLE EGG HARBOR, N.J. -- A National Guard F-16 fighter jet on a nighttime training mission Wednesday fired 25 rounds of ammunition that tore through an intermediate school. No one was injured.

That's what NJ gets for going for Kerry, I guess. ;)

I think Kerry was going to tap Holbrooke for a Cabinet post, maybe State, so that's one Repub more than Bush was/is willing to consider. Hell, that's one non-wingnut more than Bush - Powell's looking to get the boot!

What do you expect? If Kerry had won, do you think he would have said "Hey Republicans, now I'm going to implement your policies"?

And so it begins, the distortion and spin of what we say in order to make it appear insane, so that they can dismiss it.

No one -- no one is running around arguing what you say they are arguing. It isn't about Bush implementing the policies of the Democratic Party. It's about Bush, Incorporated pretending they have an overwhelming mandate to impose their grandest schemes upon a country in which nearly half of voters failed to give them their support.

Try again, prof, this time without the lying.

Well there you go. Just like his campaign, he'll reach out to people who are already on his side. That's easy! Try something difficult for once.

One of the many reasons for this war was because it's so incredibly unlikely that folks will unseat a sitting president during wartime. It's just an insurance policy. It worked. I'm not sure how many people voted for Bush as opposed to those who just - at the last minute - voted against changing our Commander in Chief in this "War on Terror" (or as I like to call it - this "Joke on America"). That's not to say that terrorist threats aren't real - obviously they are. But he's got people so scared. This country managed not to be invaded for a couple hundred years - even during a two-front war (not counting Pearl Harbor - wasn't a state yet). I don't think it's going to happen again in the near future. They're too busy beheading people in Iraq. Y'know, since we've stuck our hand in the beehive over there.

So, OK, I'll give him that - he's got the mandate for fighting this ridiculous war. The sooner we fight it and get out of it the better. But what he cannot see that as is a blank check to do whatever the hell he wants.

The one thing he has to realize is that the same percentage of folks voted for John Kerry as voted for the guy who BEAT HIM in the popular vote in 2004. And MORE people voted for his opponent than the guy who lived at 1600 before he did and who easily could have been elected to a third (fourth, fifth - coulda been the next FDR ;-)) term AND more people voted for his opponent than for his FATHER. Nevermind that approval ratings from election day have 47% of folks saying that this country is going in the wrong direction. This is not an overwhelming mandate. This is not Reagan/Mondale 1984 or even Bush/Dukakis 1988. It's not. This is a new world we're livin' in folks, and he needs to see that. We HAVE to work together or we're just going to fall apart. Unfortunately, most of the states that agree with each other aren't close enough to cecede together. ;-)

On his hot button issues in that article - I was driving down the road today thinking about Social Security and how, when I retire, it won't be there. It wasn't going to be there anyway because of the Boomers, but now it really won't be there - if we privatize it in this horrible economy we may as well just flush it down the toilet. I wonder, if when he privatizes, he'll give us young folks an "opt out." I thought "Oooh, I'd opt out - I mean, that's 7% more money for me!" But then I realized that I'd be screwing the seniors who need it NOW. It's lose/lose. Where is Al Gore and his lockbox when you need him?

And simplifying the tax code. Hmm. I don't need it simplified. My tax software does it all for me. I wonder what that really means - simplifying the tax code.

But my biggest questions have to do with the social issues.

Bush's numbers may reflect some sort of mandate, but they do not reflect full support. The majority of Americans are pro-choice to some extent. There are so few that believe that it's wrong 100% of the time. The majority of Americans support stem cell research - on new lines, not just existing ones.

So... I would be happy if he didn't destroy EVERYTHING (money we can get back - it'll take time, but we can do it) - and if he just reached out to the other side on these two issues. It's not like he's running again and it's not like Cheney has any aspirations. There's no one to pander to. But there are lives to save. Existing lives. I just hope he gets that - before it's too late.

for John Kerry as voted for the guy who BEAT HIM in the popular vote in 2004.

Obviously, I meant 2000. Oops.

Well, here's another interesting one:

"The Republican [Arlen Specter] expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush on Wednesday against putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation." - AP

"We'll have to see where he [Arlen Specter] stands," said Cornyn, a close friend of Bush who worked to get all of the president's nominees through the Senate. "I'm hoping that he will stand behind the president's nominees. I'm intending to sit down and discuss with him how things are going to work. We want to know what he's going do and how things are going to work."- AP

Interesting. Another Republican telling another Republican, it's our way or no way.

Arlen's covering his ass, and good for him. McCain, too. They stand to reap the spoils of what is left of the Republican Party after it implodes on itself in a maelstrom of alienation.

Arlen also knows that that race he just emerged from was a lot closer than it would have been if Pennsylvania wasn't dog-tired of its Senate leadership.

Of course, it's Santorum who's going to reap the whirlwind of a battle-tested Joe Hoeffel next time. To which I say, good riddance.

They have to run Hoeffel again, if only so that a new candidate doesn't have to start from jump with name ID, campaign organization, ground knowledge, etc.

That's how we got wins here in Oregon where we got them, and how we got them nationwide. Melissa Bean in Illinois drew 43 percent her last time out against now 18-term Congressman Crane. This time, she cleaned his clock just as bad. Same for Betty Komp in the District next to mine.

That's what mitigates a lot of this insanity for me - we're laying the groundwork for a juggernaut in '06 and beyond, and Hoeffel stands to reap the benefits as part of that advance force.