Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Michael Novak of National Review, displaying a view of the world completely undamaged by any contact with reality:

...What I do want to argue is that, after Washington and Lincoln, Bush is the bravest of our presidents. He has faced the most intense fire, hatred, contempt, heavily moneyed and bitterly acidic partisan opposition, underhandedness, betrayal, of any president in the last hundred years. He has faced hostility over a longer time, in possibly the most dangerous period of international warfare in our national history. He has remained constant, firm, decided, and generous (to a fault) with his opponents.

He has faced almost unbroken contempt from the academy, from the mainstream press, from Democratic elites, from Moveon and all the other holders of the Democratic-party purse strings, from the Democratic Congress, from his treacherous (if not treasonous) Central Intelligence Agency, and from many levels of the permanent State Department. Almost every day, he has been pummeled and undermined by powerful forces of American power. Still, he has stayed firm, with clear arguments, and an even clearer vision....

One hardly knows where to begin when faced with such a tidal wave of, well, nonsense.
"Bravest"? Yeah, his Vietnam record pretty much speaks for itself, as does his willingness to appear in front of any crowd at any time and take questions.
"Heavily moneyed and bitterly acidic"? Yeah, Richard Mellon Scaife, the Arkansas Project, and Limbaugh/Hannity/O'Reilly can't hold a candle to Moveon.org and Jon Stewart (ok, the last half of that is true).
"Remained constant"? Yeah, in the "if Bush decides something is true on Monday, it's still true on Wednesday (no matter what happens on Tuesday" sense.
"Most dangerous period"? Um, there was this little matter of World War I. And World War II. And the Cold War. And, for that matter, the War of 1812.
"contempt...from the mainstream press"? Gee, I always wondered why they never printed any of the crap the Swift Boat Vets were spreading about John Kerry, and why they never believed any of the administration's claims about Iraq. Now I know.
"clear arguments"? OK, this one is just beyond me.

I've been trying hard to think what could cause someone to write such a...remarkable bit of prose. Theory A involves a parallel earth with a heavily oxygen-depleted atmosphere. Theory B involves soma. Take your pick.