The Democratically controlled congress can do nothing realistic to stop the Republican's ill conceived war. The important thing to keep in mind between now and the next election is that the Republicans are trying to spread the blame around. The important thing for Democrats is not to take any.

Here is the only reasonable position for the Democratic leadership to take:

1) It's their war; we can't stop it.

2) We could refuse to fund it, but that would threaten our troops, who we completely support, and we won't do that.

3) We can't do anything because all Republicans in Congress will support anything George Bush wants, and we do not have the votes to override a veto.

4) If you want to stop this insanity, don't vote for any Republicans.

I think the Democrats have already screwed up by implying they could do something to end the war. Now they are just seen as ineffectual.

A few years ago, Paul Krugman published a little book entitled Return of Depression Economics. Depression economics is a situation in which ordinary citizens do not have enough money to buy what they need and they cannot support the supply side of the equation. (oversimplified obviously).

I think we are already psychologically into the next depression. What we are seeing in popular culture seems to me to be remarkably similar to what I get from watching movies from the depression era. Our interest in the super rich allows us to experience in fantasy what we can no longer hope to experience in fact. Much reality TV strikes me as the functional equal of marathon dance contests.

I have a couple of somewhat disconnected comments from the perspective of a psychologist and old Yalie.

Most Americans don't know anything about the real American upper class. GWB is it. His family has been rich, socially prominent and powerful for generations. To an old Yalie, third generation Skull and Bones says it all.

The only thing that really matters to GWB and his close associates is preserving the wealth and power of their social class. (Note the real thrust of all the tax cuts, etc.)

I think what Draper is describing is, in part, what I think of as the Rockefeller syndrome. If you grow up never having your ideas seriously challenged, you end up believing a bunch of funny stuff and may appear either stupid or a little crazy to other people.

If you grow up rich, it is easy to be charming. It is also easy to believe that other people should serve your interests. The sense of entitlement among these people is incomprehensible to ordinary folk.

Sociopath or psychopath may be a little strong, but there is clearly a lack of empathy or concern. The early drinking and shirking of responsibility is consistent with an antisocial personality disorder. I think all this may be more related to the class perspective described above. Psychologists don't have norms for the upper class.

The disconnect between intellect and intellectual curiosity is not that uncommon. (It's a nonlinear relationship.) I once tested a group of military civil engineers: off the high end of the scale on intelligence, off the bottom of the intellectual curiosity scale.

My own take on Bush's intellect is that he has good analytic intelligence (consider the economist story), but may be a little ADD or dyslectic.

The rating of presidents should be a function of how well they played the hand they were dealt. Jimmy Carter was an average president at a really tough time. GWB will eventually be rated as the worst president ever--at least up to this time. He's been incredibly successful in achieving his goals, except they are almost all bad for the great majority of Americans.

Democrats will continue to lose the majority of white, Southern and Border state, males with less than a college education (that's the real target group) until they have the brains and nerve to run on their only real issue: economic fairness. Republicans only represent rich people. Since 1980, white, male, working class, voters have been the most screwed group in America. Until they figure that out or somebody tells them, they will continue to vote their anger and vote for Republicans.

Without taking a position on the question of whether God exists, it is clear that one cannot possibly be a Republican and a Christian (or good Jew for that matter).

All through the Old Testament prophets and the New Testament Gospels the standard of evil behavior is not sex, abortion, or murder; it is the rich and powerful who mistreat the poor and weak. In America, we call those people Republicans.

Democrats need to go after the fundamentalist vote by telling them that if they vote for Republicans they fail the "sheep and goats" test and are going to hell.

I agree that a constitutional amendment to get rid of the electoral college system or reform the system in any significant way is not going to happen.

The original system was designed by Federalists who feared the outbreak of real democracy. (See Sean Willentz's _The Rise of American Democracy_.) Limiting the franchise, or at least the impact of some votes, remains a major objective of the Republican Party.

A more realistic goal in the short run is to convince California to get rid of its ballot initiative provision. Every year or so some person with a bunch of money and a hidden agenda comes up with something out there that will cause trouble for their citizens or for the whole country. Ballot initiatives used to be a progressive measure, but no more in the era of big money politics.