BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! You mean “grownups” like Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, and Bobby Jindal? Yes, I’m sure a grateful nation will sleep much more soundly at nigh knowing that these “grownups” are in charge.

You are correct that is very hard for us to stomach. I understand why McCain lost and expected it. Bush was not a successful president.

At the same time, America elected an amateur with no experience for the most important job in the world. I’m not surprised he’s not accomplishing much so far as he has been all style and no substance his entire life.

Hopefully, enough people will wake up in 2010 to make Obama a lame duck and in 2012, we can put the grownups back in charge.

It’s just an act.

Even more applicable – George Bush entered the Oval Office with the biggest questions over legitimacy since the 1800’s … and there was barely a mention of this in the media. You did not see news networks using his failure to win the popular vote as a platform for challenging his authority to push for major changes in the tax code, increases in military spending, and a reversal of our debt reduction program. In fact, there was no prominent comprehensive review of the path from Florida to the Supreme Court until Newsweek had a feature article – the week of 9/11/2001.

Undoubtably, from the beginning Bush received pushback from very partisan factions of the Democratic Party, particularly when his first moves upon entering office included immediately reversing one of the pledges that attracted many moderates to his campaign (that he would regulate CO2 as a pollutant), and cutting taxes for the wealthy with the long-disproved argument that it would create enough economic stimulus to eliminate the debt.

But the media, while it reported (occassionally) on some of this pushback, did not do challenging the very right of Bush to be President. And while people may claim that Dan Rather or the NY Times or others in the Corporate Media were partisan – you most certainly didn’t see anyone in the Corporate Media taking the lead in organizing major rallies and other forms of opposition to Bush’s policies.

What we see against Obama is very unique – and it echoes what we saw under Clinton, when people like Limbaugh were calling for impeachment from almost the moment he took office. It is is kind of pathetic to compare the assault on everything Obama has tried to do with the carping from the blogosphere that Bush took at the beginning of his term. Had, say, Ted Kennedy and other Dems refused to work with Bush on No Child Left Behind with the fear that giving him any legislative success would be bad for Democrats (consider Republicans now taking the lead on assaulting any attempts to impose cost-controls on Medicare, after decades of arguing that such cost-controls were absolutely necessary), and Bill Moyers been organizing rallies to label Bush’s tax cuts a looting of the Federal Treasury to benefit the wealthy, there might be a comparison that doesn’t just make the proponent look specious.

Sounds to me like the exact phrase we Democrats were using when Bush/Cheney ran their power bid for a unitary executive and when they sold a bill of goods to America to support their invasion of Iraq. I distinctly remember Neil Cavuto waving his finger in front of the camera warning any ‘liberals’ that if we didn’t get on board and shut up about Iraq we would be branded ‘anti-American’ or unpatriotic. Both O’Reilly and Limbaugh spewed the same stuff. Shut up and fall in line. We heard it. Loud and clear. Over and over…all over talk radio and TV and the Net. Maybe you don’t remember this? oh, yeah, you wouldn’t.

In truth, I greatly support your notion that you must oppose Obama’s progressive policies if you truly believe they are wrong. I also support the notion that the opposing team can disagree without calling those that oppose presidential policies as “un-American” or unpatriotic which were the smears leveled against the rest of us over and over again during the 8 disaster years of Bush/Cheney.

So oppose all you wish; it is your American right to do so.

However, you cannot disabuse those of us on the center left or left of your political views the firm unadulterated belief that this president was opposed with great hostility from the moment he stepped on the political stage, and from the moment he was sworn in. The hate is visceral, or perhaps it is possible you are not aware of it?

Unlike President Bush, who had over 90% approval ratings after the terrible event of 9/11, and when he had the American people and the world in the palm of his hands, he methodically changed public opinion. So much so that the point of last days he was down to 23% public approval. That is not hate, sir, that is deserved disrespect.

What we are seeing now is absolutist hate and fear-mongering because the Republican party cannot own up to their own miserable record of failure both domestic and foreign in the last 8 years. They cannot stomach the idea that the Democrats won both Congress and the Presidency.

Sour grapes. Sore losers. That’s about it and that’s why there is a concerted effort to bring this President down at all costs. The Republican party now is virtually a circle the wagons and hate and fear-monger their way back to the presidency…or so they hope. They offer very little in constructive ideas instead of blatant obstructionism.

Rep Grayson was right…if the President think a BLT is a great sandwich, the Republicans would try to ban bacon.

I oppose Obama. And I would prefer that he not win a second term.

The right to oppose Obama is a right that you Obama supporters are increasingly desirous of denying to the rest of us. We must simply fall in line and nod.

NO THANK YOU.

Are there enough trauma centers in the country to take care of all the heads that would explode?