How could we have elected such a twistedly self-justifying ne'er-do-well as the one who now sits in the Oval Office? 

It is not as if George W. has done anything out of character since assuming the Presidency.  His overreaching ineptitude in the Iraqi adventure was really just a further iteration of a pattern that was already well established in his business ventures.

It has been widely observed that a large portion of Bush’s election success stems from his ability to get people to identify with him.

It seems likely that this ability goes all the way back to his election as president of his fraternity at Yale.  I also suspect that his outward brashness has always covered major doubts about his own adequacy--a large portion of which may stem from the difficulty of measuring up to the standards of his ultra-high prestige family.  Since family issues of this type are not uncommon at schools like Yale, I can easily imagine Bush’s fraternity brothers seeing themselves in him--and liking the combination of brashness and humor (sometimes cruel) that he displayed in coping with their shared anxieties.

What about today?  Who now identifies with George W. Bush, and in what ways?

Much has already been made of his appeal to certain wealthy business interests, and to fundamentalist Christians.  Substantial as these elements are, they are not the only sources of his support.

Two related sources of Bush support that we ought to be paying more attention to are the police and the military.

To begin with, you can hardly find a cop or soldier these days who didn’t vote for Bush.  You’ll also hear as much government-bashing in these circles as you will anywhere in American life.  And in their combined numbers, police and military are more than enough to have tipped two extremely close elections his way.

Like Bush, these folks are rather incongruously dependent for their livelihood on the same government they so enthusiastically berate. 

The parallels warrant exploration.