No, it's the politics of pragmatism and Democracy. If the majority is dissatisfied with the existing system, they will change it. At which point it doesn't matter whether you or anybody else thought the system was good. If you want to keep it you need to convince the majority of its merits or at least keep them comfortable enough that they can't be bothered organizing against you.

This is why I'm so critical of the Bush administration - because they failed so badly that Obama became a possible (though superficial) alternative for a number of Americans. That is the ONE (and ONLY one) area where I'll give Obama credit over Bush....Obama is clearly a tax-and-spend bleeding heart liberal who apologies to our enemies, and most know it. Obama is largely as he appears. Bush, on the other hand, was largely the opposite of how he "appeared" (and how the media portrayed him).

As much contempt as I feel for the American public that voted for Obama, as much as I'm angry that they didn't take a closer look at what he was actually proposing....I place large blame on Bush for his poor performance as a leader.

Yes, the majority was dissatisfied - FOR ALL THE WRONG REASONS. Bush didn't fail as a representative of captialism - his economic mistakes are due to his abandoning of market-based economics. Bush isn't a war-hawk - we haven't succeeded enough in our fight against Islamic terrorism because we haven't done ENOUGH.

But most people superficially thought that Bush was capitalism and brute military force to the 100th degree - and because their premises are wrong, because Obama's premises are wrong, it is likely their proposed changes will be wrong or worse. Sadly, American has not learned the lesson of how far FDR drove the U.S. more deeply into the Great Depression in the early and mid 1930's. And what's even worse is that the Rush Limbaugh's and other conservative talking heads don't delve deeply enough into WHY Obama will fail.

And it's the same type of superficlal thinking that you're promoting here - that there's no difference between the wealthy in the U.S. today and the wealthy English whom we fought against. Superficial conclusions get people into trouble.