scarborough gets a clue...

joe scarborough is par for the MSNBC course, the unctuous, self-satisfied repo-bot with the slanted, fact-challenged talking points always at the ready... but in his case, i curiously find i'm willing to cut him more slack, whereas i cannot abide the likes of, say, chris matthews, who sold out his mentor tip o'neill a long time ago in a galaxy far far away... scarborough, at least, came by his scaliwag worldview more honestly, i.e., he was bred into the dark side...

but when he analyzed john kerry's '04 debate performances vs. dubya as superior, which, of course, was the correct conclusion (who knew?), and he was effusive in his praise of kerry, i sat up, thinking i must've dropped acid and had somehow forgotten...

and now he comes up with this:

Friends and foes alike agree that George W. Bush is one political figure who gets worse with age. Look back at his performance as Texas governor and you will see a funny, self-assured public figure who inspires confidence. But these days, the mere opening of Mr. Bush’s mouth makes many GOP loyalists shake in their tasseled loafers.

So does it matter in the end whether our president is articulate and intelligent?

You bet your life, it does. I’m not saying we need to elect a dork like Michael Dukakis, who famously spent vacations at the beach reading books on Swedish land use or was so overwhelmed with the details of the old SALT treaties that he would sulk off to bed
depressed.

But when America is fighting a global war on terror where the battle is for hearts and minds instead of beachheads and landing strips, we need a leader who can explain to friend and foe alike why America is in Iraq, why we keep sending arms to Israel and why liberal democracy really is preferable to Islamic fascism.

Right now, George W. Bush is not that leader.

of course, the point not addressed here is what took the republicans referenced so long in figuring this out... ?