There is no distinction between the Constitutional rule of law and Constitutional freedoms….they are one and the same. Think about it.

The LAWS guarantee our FREEDOMS.

And King: there are just too many errors in your last comment for me to address. We've been down this road before.

I would recommend you do a post validating this…..

"That would include rendition, tracking communications without warrants, and firing US attorneys."

You have some apples mixed in with your oranges. I understand the cul-de-sac attempts to find equivalency…..but go ahead and show your work, proving what you said is true…..and then we'll have a real good discussion.

About Gitmo, closing it doesn't answer anything, because Obama didn't say what he was going to do with the prisoners. Until that question is answered, it's just a a political move for show.

About hoping Obama fails – I can't even believe you raised this issue. What a short memory you must have. Liberals spent 8 years attempting to undermine Bush at every turn. And I suppose it never occurs to you that almost everything liberals accuse Bush of, Clinton did too. That would include rendition, tracking communications without warrants, and firing US attorneys. Clinton even went to war without Congressional approval (Bosnia). Bush got permission both times. In addition to the "sex stuff" (the issue was actually perjury, btw, not sex (which was actually the sexual ABUSE of Paula Jones, to whom Slick Willie paid $800,000), Clinton also had the FBI files of 900 political enemies at the White House (Filegate). That episode was roughly equivalent to a little scandal you might remember from the 70's, called Watergate. Then there was Travelgate, Whitewater, and all those other -gates.

I don't think you want to raise the specter of the "vast right-wing conspiracy" regarding Clinton. He was given more passes for bad behavior than any president in memory.

About the 2000 election – you forgot to mention that all counts, recounts, and a later independent recount showed that Bush won Florida. Must have slipped your mind. The Supreme Court made the correct and only decision it could make.

Lawn Jockey: Jeb Clampett maybe, but not Jeb Bush.

King: I never took you for a denier of Obama's citizenship. Who knew?

average: Got a lot of misinformation in your comment, but setting that aside for a second……Obama said he would close Gitmo, get us out of Iraq, and stop the torture…..already, he has taken actions, not just words, to fulfill those promises. Not bad for 48 hours.

dd20: You're right, and I will. At the same time, there are many wrongs that must be righted. When Obama rights them, I'll be pointing out why they needed corrected and who introduced the wrong in the first place.

cloverfield: Very thoughtful comment. Of course, I overstated the case. Not all of any group thinks the same thing.

I suggest to you that 30% of the nation's voters support Rush Limbaugh's wish that Obama fails. That is a real time delegitimizing of another Democratic president, this time, before he even gets started.

I don't know what you would call the impeachment of a Democratic president for fibbing about consensual sex in a civil suit later thrown out. If that's not delegitimizing just for the sake of it…..and all Republican leaders thought Clinton's tenure was not legitimate. Ross Perot, according to the GOP, stole Poppy's second term and gave it to Willie. For 8 full years the GOP stalked Clinton…..didn't come up with anything. I fail to see how that isn't an entire political party refusing to recognize a president.

On the 2000 election….it is incorrect to say that Bush stole the election. It is correct, however, to say that the Supreme Court appointed Bush to office in a decision that should have never been made. The Justices felt so guilty for doing what they did…..they stated that the ruling was a one-off and shouldn't be referred to as precedent.

On the 2004 election, you have it all mixed up. Sorry. There was no evidence of voter fraud, whatsoever. But there were numerous questionable situations in Ohio….losing votes, miscalculating votes, denying voters with long lines,….and what was that again that Blackwell was up to? In addition, Bush won in 2004 because of the wingnut turnout for 17 gay bashing state initiatives. He and Karl were so proud of themselves for successfully getting their hate on.

Finally, from the beginning of the Bush administration, the biggest change from Clinton was the wanton lawlessness. Clinton is not my favorite….but Bush-Cheney were lawless from beginning to end. Obama's strong comment about returning to the rule of law and the Constitution was soothing to my ears.

All jokes aside, I have never "not fully recognized" the Carter or Clinton presidencies. None of my conservative friends have ever "not fully recognized" the Carter or Clinton presidencies. Many may think they were not very effective presidencies (at least in a positive way), but none have ever "not fully recognized" them.

Thinking a little deeper on the entire point to this blog entry, I tried to consider what kind of people in this country really do NOT fully recognize presidencies. The first type of people that come to mind are the millions of liberals who, for the past eight years, claimed Bush "stole" the election. They did so by protests on college campuses and random street corners, bumper stickers on Volkswagens and other small, beat-up go-carts, err, cars, unwashed t-shirts, hand-made signs, and the like.

In 2000 we heard how, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers created the Electoral College for a reason, Bush did not really win the election because he did not win the popular vote.

In 2004 we heard how Bush was GOING to steal the election. And, despite widespread voter fraud from liberal groups like ACORN, we were told that Bush DID steal the election. So again, even with the largest win by popular vote count in presidential history, we were told that Bush was not REALLY the president.

I guess my point is this: the next time you decide to write a blog about what conservatives believe, 1/ Make sure they actually believe what you CLAIM they do, and 2/ Make sure that YOUR political affiliation is not the ACTUAL guilty party of the crime you spend the blog complaining about.