Be careful that when you go to the polls you don't end up voting for a third Bush term. That would happen if you elect -- no, not John McCain:
We're beginning to understand why Barack Obama keeps protesting so vigorously against the prospect of "George Bush's third term." Maybe he's worried that someone will notice that he's the candidate who's running for it.
Most Presidential candidates adapt their message after they win their party nomination, but Mr. Obama isn't merely "running to the center." He's fleeing from many of his primary positions so markedly and so rapidly that he's embracing a sizable chunk of President Bush's policy. Who would have thought that a Democrat would rehabilitate the much-maligned Bush agenda?
What do you know? This is almost Change I Can Believe In.
Just kidding. What if we try for a third George Washington term? I think he's the last one most of us agree got the job done right.
Comments
Actually I was kind of hoping for William Henry Harrison's first term.
William Henry Harrison may not have done much other damage as President, but he did give an inaugural speech that was lethal, at least to himself, and as far as I can tell, he didn't do much good.
I'd prefer a second term of Thomas McKean, the President who won the Revolutionary War.
McKean was elected president of this country on July 10, 1781. He set up a peace commission on July 11, and in October, the british army surrendered following the battle of Yorktown.
He was also Chief Justice of Pennsylvania, and resigned effective November 4, 1781 to go attend to his court.
As one of those curious coincidences, President McKean succeeded Thomas Mifflin as governor of Pennsylvania in 1799, and in 1803, Mifflin became one of McKean's successors as President.
It is mere coicidence that Thomas McKean's name was often spelled "McKane."
Cite?