[Steve_Seattle]

"Of course, “new tone” and “uniter not a divider” attitude played a role."

Bush really failed the test of "know thine enemy." He understands al-Quaeda better than he understands the Democrats, and the Dems are every bit as much his enemy as AQ.

Bush should have known that a party that was so brazen as to blame him for the economic downturn before he was even elected (the "Bush is 'talking down the economy' mantra during the 2000 campaign), would never give him a fair shake. And the Florida election debacle just sealed that.

And it was obvious from day one that the Dems - stung by Clinton's lying - had developed a game plan to accuse Bush of also being a liar - about something, anything - and so "Bush lied" became another mantra when the Iraq intelligence appeared to be flawed. The fact that every Dem had said the same things about Iraq was ignored, with cooperation from the MSM.

The Bush family noblesse oblige is simply a suicidal way of dealing with the Dems and the MSM. If only Bush were 1/10th as ruthless as the Dems say he is.

[CutePuppy]

“The Bush family noblesse oblige is simply a suicidal way of dealing with the Dems”...

Well said. Yes, the “new tone” attitude is really a “tone-deaf” one. One can try it once, but if it fails then “fool me once...” principle should start kicking around in the brain, or should I say, the skull (bad pun, but couldn’t resist).

To me, W’s benevolence towards his avowed domestic enemies and relationship with Kennedy is like Peggy Noonan’s apt description of Bush Sr. relationship with Bill Clinton - “creepy”. I don’t understand these. To paraphrase, noblesse oblige is not a suicide pact, there should be limits. But, then again, I was not brought up Bush, and my blood only turns blue when it lacks oxygen.