Titus: Hmmm...

As much as it still tickles me to see the GOP implode with such fiery abandon (it must be a remnant of my misguided liberal youth), this kind of issue is negating the GOP's ability to point to items like Lewinski as indicative of general "liberal Democrat" behavior and is taking away the moral "high ground" that the GOP has fronted since the 1970's.

Now, while I am not a subscriber to the idea that the GOP has a lock on moral issues in this nation, and I still feel that the largest of moral issues are out of the realm of governmental authority anyway, the GOP does need to do a serious bit of self-examination over the next few months, so that the party can focus on needed issues and topics for the next year... '08 (election year, for those who live on Tatooine or Curosant... hehe).

A "resurgence"? I don't know. Keep in mind that the general feeling of malaise in this country concerning government stems from only one real source... perceived government failings. In 2001, we had the invasion of Afghanistan. In 2003, the invasion of Iraq. In 2005 we had the single, largest, most devastating natural disaster to EVER hit the US (Katrina... damn her!). Spread over the entire time frame, we have run-away gas prices, a housing market that is about to crash due to damn-near criminal corporate refinancing practices and killer interest rates, an economy that can't seem to self-sustain at all, and a job market that is as low as it has been in 35 years.

None of these issues have been satisfied in the eyes of the general public either. The focus of the resulting unhappiness is always going to be the White House (and Congress, to a lesser degree), and that means people are going to associate the failings of government (real or perceived) as the fault of the GOP and G.W. Bush. That is the biggest road-block to a resurgence, not some men's room trist by a has-been Senator from Idaho.

As concerns the comment made by Jambo and his "report cord"... I did say he sent his final grades, but if you recall the discussion, we talked of a project where we combined our efforts into a uniform format and could refine and revisit topics at will. I did not get THAT kind of input from Jambo... only a list of his final grades.

Now that I think about it, though... it may be that James' list of Presidents went as far back as McKinley. My later work on the topic did take the list back all the way to the 19th Century, and he may have given me that big of a list. Let me look into it.

Surely no one will argue that an idea as well-thought and meaty as this one is worth revisiting... especially as this is such a great format (the blog, I mean) for publishing and viewing (read showing) the content to a large audience.

Who would contend that an objective, rational look at the actions and abilities of former (and one current) President isn't something the three of us could be very good at? At least one of us is capable of doing volumes of research on historical data, while another is an accomplished writer (and "published"... yes, we know!), and between the three of us, we have a broad, balanced view of history... a Democrat, a Conservative Republican, and a moderate "fence sitter".

Once again, I state: This is an idea worth pursuing, my friends.