As a lifelong Red Sox fan the joy of 2004 was made even sweeter by the pain of disappointment I still harbored from 1986. Politically, I look forward to a similar day when I can enter a voting booth with enthusiasm. My first opportunity to vote in 1988 was as much a disappointment as a thrill. I had missed by four years the sole man who was worthy of that vote. In that election, and in every election since, I have held my nose entering the polls -- always voting for the lessor of two evils. I trust that the day I venture to vote without such regrets and put my disappointments since 1988 behind me will be just as sweet as the end of my drought in 2004.

Just wait. Events will prove that Bush was the right man for the right job at the right time.

He may have risen to the occasion temporarily following 9-11, but on my Burke-Kirk-Reagan scale, he is a disappointment since. In fact, he was such a disappointment before the attack, he would probably have suffered his father's fate in 2004. Many on the Left may not appreciate the differences, but they are vast between neocons and more deeply rooted conservatives (as in the the line from Burke to Tocqueville to Kirk to Buckley, et al.) And, as the 1992 election showed, the former group cannot win election without the support of the latter.

I can relate.
And why must we agonize the atmosphere with such jagged, negative hateful vibrations from the radicals in the meantime?!
Let the time arrive.

You vote, you do the best you can with the choices presented, and you show the appropriate opposition to the guy who seems most likely to bring trouble.

That's part of the 'problem'. People accepting the 'choices' available and pulling the trigger. A dead horse is a dead horse. People need to realize the difference between the one that can win the race, or just run in the race.

Can't fire the president? WTF? It's easy - IMPEACH. What a bunch of excuses for gutless wonders.