Sorry about getting carried away.
Anyhoo, it seems like just last week that Bush was saying he didn't need to mix-up his staff because the steady, reliable idiocy his administration has delivered is good for the country:
"I've got a staff of people that have, first of all, placed their country above their self-interests," he said at the time. "These are good, hardworking, decent people. And we've dealt with a lot. We've dealt with a lot. We've dealt with war. We've dealt with recession. We've dealt with scandal. We've dealt with Katrina.
"I mean, they've had a lot on their plate. And I appreciate their performance and their hard work and they've got my confidence," he said.
Bush said, "I'm satisfied with the people I've surrounded myself with. We've been a remarkably stable administration, and I think that's good for the country."
It'd be hard to miss all the chirping by the talking heads about the need for Bush to shake-up his staff. Rumsfield and Rove are the names most often thrown out as possible replacements but really everybody in the cabinet has been bantered about. The idea seems to be that Bush could arrest his low poll numbers by changing course. Or at least putting another helmsman at the wheel.
I've had a hard time finding myself interested in this sort of supposition, personally. I don't really see Bush's low poll numbers as America's problem.
Bush is America's problem.
The chance to make a change in course and fix that problem was November of 2004 and the American people collectively blew it. No matter who is crewing the ship as long as we keep the same Captain and First Mate. You know; the one's that keep insisting that the big iceberg we're heading straight towards is really a giant marshmallow.
Things won't turn around until Bush walks out of the White House in January of 2009 and gets on that Marine helicopter. Everything short of that is just a tempest in a teapot.
(* I was curious to see where I'd wind-up after I die so, rather than soul searching and introspection which would take like forever I found the online test linked below. As a virtuous non-believer I'm going to Limbo. At least I won't be on the 8th level with the Bush administration hacks. Oh, and take my score summary worth a hill of beans. I scored "low" in gluttonous. I have news for you Mr. online-hellquiz-maker: I'm PLENTY gluttonous, thank you very much.)
The Dante's Inferno Test has sent you to the First Level of Hell - Limbo!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
|Purgatory (Repenting Believers)||Low|
|Level 1 - Limbo (Virtuous Non-Believers)||Very High|
|Level 2 (Lustful)||Very High|
|Level 3 (Gluttonous)||Low|
|Level 4 (Prodigal and Avaricious)||Very Low|
|Level 5 (Wrathful and Gloomy)||Very Low|
|Level 6 - The City of Dis (Heretics)||Moderate|
|Level 7 (Violent)||Moderate|
|Level 8- the Malebolge (Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers)||Moderate|
|Level 9 - Cocytus (Treacherous)||Low|
Take the Dante's" Inferno Hell Test