"Some days, I just go home and cry. Then I get mad at myself for crying. I want to kill the bastard, but that wouldn't do any good, since he's mostly a figurehead."

"You can't kill a ghost, no matter how personable he might be."

"Yeah, I know. So I go to the fridge and pop a Chimay Blue."

"You guys have Allagash Curieux yet? That'll cure your blues."

"Are you kidding? That's my favorite beer in the world. You guys have it here? I've got to get me a case before we go home tomorrow."

I was talking to a friend Friday night at a "we passed the goddamned law!" celebration in Raleigh, partying with just a few of the high gravity beers now allowed in North Carolina. She (I decline to name her because, you know, communicating a threat against the President is a felony) lives in Asheville, and while the law change was statewide, local wholesalers have been moving the "new" beers into stores in a rather haphazard fashion. For example, folks out west have been enjoying some of the Avery big beers for almost a month, while we have yet to see all of them here in the greater Durham-Raleigh-etc. metro area.

Oh, and Allagash Curieux comes only in 750ml bottles. It retails for $13.99 here, putting the cost of a case of twelve (if you don't get a discount) at $167.88. I'm sure she could talk shopkeeper down to $150, but I think she'd pay face value if necessary. Beer geeks don't mind spending money on good beer.

But by and large, we're getting increasingly pissed off about funding a useless and wasteful war. For some reason, beer geeks in North Carolina (and I've met hundreds in the last two years, so I feel pretty comfortable with a mass characterization) tend toward the left or the libertarian...and neither side is pleased with what's going on in Iraq. Turns out we're not the only ones.

Dan Froomkin, who writes the pleasantly snarky White House Briefing column for the Washington Post web site, observed in a recent column that polls have indeed exposed a "silent majority"--and it turns out to be antiwar. "Who knew?" he asked.

Everyone who doesn't live in Washington, I think. Here in North Carolina, a state that touts itself as "the most military-friendly state in the nation" (I wouldn't argue with that, as more than a million of the nearly 10 million residents of our fine state are employed by the military, are dependents of military employees or are retired from the military), defenders of the war are the ones who have become more and more defensive over the last six months. Even Congressman Walter Jones, the dingbat who had the congressional cafeteria change the name of french fries to "freedom fries," has publicly stated that we need to start talking about leaving Iraq. Jones's district includes Camp LeJeune and many other military bases. And his position hasn't provoked any widespread outrage among his constituents.

I live in the People's Republic of Durham, and more specifically, in one of the most liberal neighborhoods within the city. I can't count the number of friends and neighbors who are in Washington this weekend. But that's why I don't rely on my personal contacts to figure out what's going on. Rather, I watch. And listen.

Last week, I watched the news as Cindy Sheehan led an antiwar rally in Fayetteville, which is home to Ft. Bragg. A few folks hollered at her, but she attracted a large, supportive crowd. Local congressmen (Republicans and Democrats alike) are berated repeatedly by constituents who want to know when we're leaving Iraq. No one seems to believe anything that comes out of the White House...including some people who still support the Prez. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say, "Hey, you can't trust the sonofabitch, but he's the only one who can get us out of this mess." It's an appallingly senseless sentiment--after all, the Prez is the one who got us into this mess--but it does signal a tidal shift in national opinion.

The clearest expression of that change is in the renewed vigor of the national press corps. A couple years ago, I noticed that New York Times had begun to flatly contradict inaccurate statements within news stories. So if the creepy Veep came out of seclusion to make an "important" speech in West Nut, Ohio, and repeated the old saw about Iraq and 9/11, the next sentence in the story would be something to the effect of "no link between the events of September 11, 2001 and Saddam Hussein has ever been established." In other words, reporters were allowed (and, as it turns out, required) to call bullshit on sources who lie to them.

This is as it should be. The reporting on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina (which will continue for some time, of course) is only the most obvious sign of journalists remembering what it really means to be members of the Fourth Estate--that "shadow" branch of American society that holds the power of the government in check. Even White House reporters, long known for a (generally) callous and lazy obsequiousness, have begun to fight back during the daily briefings, shouting down the White House Spokesman if he tries to deliver an obvious lie. These visible displays of backbone are driving a resurgence in the number of folks who see the need for an active and independent media. Television journalists, in particular, have seen their positive ratings improve by double digits in the last month.

That last bit isn't necessarily important. But the increasing numbers of Americans who actually pay attention to what their government does--and hold their government accountable for its actions--can only be good for the nation. No matter how incompetent, corrupt or criminal an administration may be, the American people are the ones ultimately responsible. We put these arrogant morons in office. Everything they do is on our collective conscience. And we're going to have to live with that.

But until then, we ought to be petitioning for redress. We've got a lot of redress coming our way.

Jon Worley knows good redress when he sees it. And he hasn't seen any in a long time.