We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Jeffrey Bell at Weekly Standard wonders how the Repubs might deal with the aftermath of a "failed presidency."
It's a worthwhile piece, but I am far from sure that Bush has been a failure - unless the measure of failure is the popularity poll of the week. Few presidents remain popular towards the end of 8 years, because everything they have done annoyed somebody.
The success of presidencies is always relative to the conditions of the times making them difficult to judge. And when times are unexpectedly challenging it becomes more about that individual’s style (and their help) than it is about the horse they rode in on.
“You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.”
truth has a leg up on gaining the power if and when the politics is in good faith ("the art of compromise").
But the ''good faith'' rises and falls on that ''likeability'' factor.
My mom used to say --unapprovingly-- that "if you like somebody they can do no wrong, if you don't, they can do no right''.
So the circle comes round to good faith again, because a person of good faith 'can't' like a scoundrel.
I guess that's why Bill Clinton is so unsettling ('corrupting') -- it's not so much him as it is what their affection for him says about our fellow citizens, toward whom we want--or should want-- to have good will.