You may be right about Bush's ratings. It's a long, long way to 2004, and I was not impressed by the Republican showings in the governors' races. (The New York mayor win was probably a fluke, based on the current mayor's popularity, although with New York Democrats outnumbering Republicans five to one, it was still impressive.)

I am really interested in seeing what happens in the 2002 elections, but I'm not really expecting much of a Republican showing.

The Democrats offer FREE LUNCH FOR EVERYBODY! Which as far as the average voter is concerned, is apparently paid for by numberless hordes of winged monkeys flying out of Ted Kennedy's immense cratered butt carrying huge bags of money in all four fists.

There is no easy way to compete against this, and the largely philosophically ignorant Republicans don't look like they have what it takes to do it. It's never been easy selling the hard, rocky road of freedom when the wide, smooth road to socialist Hell is so inviting.

Bush's performance in the war is excellent, but he has already made many odd concessions to the left in other areas, and I don't know if he has the solid confidence in his own philosophy to carry off a reelection. Once the war has settled down, I'm afraid the Democrats are going to treat him to one Lucy-holding-the-football "bipartisan" drygulching after another. Hey, Bush. It's a war here at home, too. Get a clue.

As the Sheriff said in "Blazing Saddles,"

"I AM depressed."*

Hell, I may go back to voting Libertarian again. Maybe L. Neil Smith will run.

*Don't even think about fielding that straight line.