Enjoyed the piece from the North Carolina, Rhino. Aside from the rationalization and excuse making the article had a lot of thoughtful material in it.

Back to your post,

>"I think one way to tell a person's politics and philosophy is by which side in many of these conflicts one chooses to trust. Bush? Saddam? Sharon? Arafat? Kim Chong-il? Maybe a real cynic assumes that everyone is lying."

Probably the best way to tell a person's politics and philosophy is to ask him.

And frankly I don't choose to trust any of the jamokes. And choosing which miscreant to trust is not one of my obligations of citizenship as I understand it.

As a citizen of the greatest democratic (note for ebnelson and SDAI--this is a small "d" not a capital "D" there is a difference) nation since Athens, trust and faith in the leadership is supposed to be a non-issue.

If we are to be the open society we claim to be, the participatory involvement of the people should be acquired by leadership using facts and issues. Not relying on drumming up evangelical "trust" or "faith" that the leadership will do the right thing.

Save that for your church or cult of choice, don't inflict me with it.

As for your assertion that Bush is not an idiot, I hope you are right. The evidence doesn't seem to support that so far. History will have to be the judge.

Publius