Glad I could be reassuring on that one point about confidence in the military.

I think you got it right, you just like to complicate things. It's too soon for you to have completely rewritten the history of the 2006 election. As we all know, Democrats did so well in the 2006 Congressional elections because of a great deal of dissatisfaction with Bush in particular and Republican governance in general. They built the expectations pretty high for a change of course, if not an outright halt to Bush's march to the throne...and badly disappointed the ~70% of us who think Bush has done and continues to do a horrifically bad job.

"Suckers" you say? Perhaps, or perhaps it was just another in a long line of letdowns by all politicians. Speaking of "suckers", you ought to read Scott McClellan's book. There's a True Believer who actually thought Bush meant it when, in 2000, he promised to radically break with the way things had been done, to be a uniter and not a divider, to reach across the aisles, and in general bring honor to the White House and elevate the tone in Washington. Scotty is one sorely disillusioned puppy these days.

So, when you've stopped crying, and I've stopped laughing, you want to throw around "sucker" some more? Wanna tell me you're still proud of voting for Bush, twice??

"Sucker" right back atcha.