Okay, some of you may say I'm a paranoid delusional, but I do believe Bush has every intention of staying on past 2008. Think about it:

• While this would certainly represent a coup, how terribly different would it be from the coup that installed him in power in 2000? Same but without an end date. If the networks make sure American Idol doesn't get preempted with news coverage of it, there will be no resistance from the American people, by and large.
• Remaining Commander in Chief during war time might be the only thing that stands between him and prosecution for war crimes
• Remaining in the presidency is the only way the country can avoid drawing a line under the Iraq disaster and concluding it as a terrible net loss. If Bush remains in power, he can avoid this terrible accounting, keep the graft flowing to his contractor cronies, and keep the permanent military bases from which to launch future attacks on other oil-producing countries, when the need inevitably arises.
• The one remaining issue that I thought would prevent Bush from doing something like this is that the military would reject it, and they would. However, the GOP have their own private army of contractors that I believe is actually larger than the US military, with the ability to expand even larger.

I would love to conclude that BDS has resulted in my own rampant paranoia. However, my hatred and fear of Bush does seem to have its roots in many, many real things that have already come to pass.

...before coming up north on the Freedom Train. From my experience, I can tell you that Senior Tilda's comments are typical. And he clearly identifies with the driver of the Tomato Car. According to many, there is no crime on earth worse than making a driver an additional 5 seconds late. The Chinese Cultural Revolution is nothing compared to someone who doesn't floor it when the light turns green, like they were in the Indy 500. People guilty of this crime deserve death or worse, according to many Angelinos.

For me, hearing that Senior Tilda is one of these people provided a big piece of the puzzle in trying to understand this curmudgeonly character.

But, when you consider the mountains of cash waiting for him--from corporations that want him on their board, from a book publisher, and of course from all those people willing to pay good money to hear him speak--he will not be able to resist the gravy train.

In fact, in a recent interview, Bush expressed a strong interest in hooking up to exactly this gravy train. I wish I could find the quote, because it's priceless.

However, who would pay to hear Bush speak? Republicans? Please. Bush has been the biggest embarrassment to the GOP, and I know they're dying to no longer have him as their albatross. Corporations? Do you really think Bush will leave office (assuming he leaves) with any political capital whatsoever to benefit his contributors?

If anyone has seen The Office (BBC version), Bush has as much chance at having a lucrative career as a paid speaker, as David Brent had as a motivational speaker. And the results would be no less hilarious.

But no, I don't think it's going to happen. And I think Bush has received a reality check about it too. Hence, I see his comment today as a testing of the waters.

Following what Lev Raphael and heelinhell said about receiving phone calls from Democratic fundraisers, I also gave them that same rant that I wouldn't give a dime to the DNC until they grew a pair.

I also included a mini-rant against my own senator, Diane Feinstein, saying that with democrats like her, who the hell needs republicans. The person on the phone calling for the DNC agreed with me wholeheartedly, and the two of us shared a momentary rant before I said goodbye.

From what I can gather, the only people who are pleased with the democratic performance over the last several years are the democratic politicians themselves, who get to keep their fancy offices in DC as well as in their home state and having fun parties and talk to important people, and republicans at large.

When that's not even something the Iranians have challenged let alone complained about. Iran wants to be a regional superpower. It has little to do with our weapons.

Actually, I've read a quote from Ahmadinejad that made that precise complaint. I can't find it at the moment, but I do recall that complaint being made.

I'm not sure what point you're making by discussing Iran's neighbors or Europe. Sure, Iran has some nuclear neighbors nearby, chief among them Israel (in terms of the mullahs' concern). However, perhaps apart from Israel (which is indistinguishable from the US in terms of foreign policy), none of those countries have threatened regime change on Iran. Only the US has. And with an example of disastrous American regime change happening right next door, the mullahs must feel a clear and present danger that can be addressed by possessing a few nukes (see Kim Jong Il).

Combine the open threat made by the US against Iran, with the fact that the US is also violating the NPT (the very treaty the US expects Iran to honor).

All told, from what I can see, bellicose behavior in the US is the prime mover of the Iranian nuclear program.