After the 2000 Florida election debacle there was a lot of carping from the left that Bush was "selected not elected." Well, it was hogwash then and it's hogwash now. The (Democrat-dominated) Florida Supreme Court went outside the law in search of a way to get Al Gore more votes.

To quote now-appeals court nominee Michael McConnell:

One sentence of the Florida Supreme Court's decision on hand recounts tells it all: "The will of the people, not a hyper-technical reliance upon statutory provisions, should be our guiding principle."

That is like saying, of a disputed umpire call in the World Series: "Athletic superiority, not a hyper-technical reliance upon the rules of baseball, should be our guiding principle." In our system, the will of the people is manifested through procedures specified in advance. When those rules are changed in mid-stream, something has gone terribly wrong.

In the wake of Sept. 11, these cries of illegitimacy were now considered beyond the pale -- and only the most muddle-headed liberals, America-haters and Frenchmen still used the argument.

Alterman has now counted himself (fifth item) among those who have lost their credibility on the war, by using the specious claim that Bush is somehow an interloper in the White House.

Finally: Here's a couple of historians' posting from the Listserve, H-Diplo, comparing LBJ and Vietnam with GWB and the proposed Iraqi war. They are pretty interesting. They do, however, fail to note that another shared characteristic of both presidents is that neither man had been honestly elected president when deciding to embark upon an aggressive war.

Of course, maybe Alterman's right. If George W. Bush really is president he's just the type of guy who would toss Alterman in jail as an enemy combatant for his dishonest vociferous attacks. Since Alterman is still walking around free, someone else must be president. I wonder who it is.