Just out of curiousity, Jim, on the chance that Bush wins, how to you think he'll deal with it?

Any other opinions aside, I think we can take Mr. Bush at his word (of Thursday 9/11/2003):

"....and we will stay at war until we have achieved our objective."

Bush and Co. are suffused with righteousness. If he is re-elected, which, given his sliding numbers and declining military morale, I doubt, it will be because his base of righteous evangelical supporters hold fast. Quite some time ago, when Bush was alleged to have made a "slip" in using the term "Crusade", I expect that Bush was completely unaware that this was a slip (until some bright handler told him that it might not be the best choice of words). There is still a solid vein of support for Bush administration policies. So what does Bush's promise mean?

Just what he says. "We will stay at war until we meet our objectives."

What are our objectives? Well there's the tricky part. At the point that we went to war in Afghanistan, we somehow acceded to an Elastic War. Not content with a rational "War Against Al Quaeda", somebody in Washington felt that the effort wouldn't be worthy until we inflated this to an undefinable "War on Terror". Aw, crap, why don't we just drop the "terror" technicality and call it the "War on Evil". Well, with a War on Evil, what are our objectives? Getting rid of Evil, of course. How long might that take? How much might it cost? Well, A) forever and B) more than we are able to count.

In past lives, when I saw a coworker figuratively banging their head against the wall as they attempted to solve a problem, I'd say "Hey, you're banging your head against the wall. Stop it." The specter of a 2nd Bush term means 4 years of head banging. Righteous head-banging, though, to the satisfaction of the faithful.

I mean, if the economy sinks any furthur, I'll never find ANY kind of job.

Oh, Grasshopper, would it be possible for us to open a dialogue about the unique value proposition represented by my employer's deep-fried diced potatoes?