the "we" is used to mean inclusiveness, as in The Declaration of Independence…dummy.

Yes, we have an adversarial political system – and there has never been and never will be any other kind. There is nothing honorable in it.

I don't understand why you think this. We have an adversarial political system, both sides know they are not speaking for many on the other side. Pres. Bush knows he isn't speaking for Dems and many Dem supporters and Pelosi knows she isn't speaking for Republicans.

Our elected officials make an argument about policy and other things to get elected, we raise our hands and count up the votes. They argue with each other about legislation. They raise their hands and count up the votes. The only arrogance it takes is believing the policies you advocate are better than the policies of the other side. That's not arrogant, it's just having an opinion.

I'm not sure why you threw McCain's name in at the last:

"no one within a light year of humility wants the kind of power and gaudy glory that Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain so desperately seek."

Your discussion is entirely about Obama, so the insertion of "Mr. McCain" seems completely out of place.

You may define anyone who seeks to be president as lacking sufficient humility for your taste, but in that case what is the point of enumerating Obama's propensity for self worship:

"No truly humble person – no person who understands the limits of his own intelligence and capacity – parades around posing as the first plural pronoun in the outrageously narcissistic chant 'we are the change we have been waiting for.'"

Don't get me wrong Don, I agree with you that Obama lacks humility, but I would rate "Mr. McCain" a piker by comparison. (and I'll bet you agree with me on this)