How Will History Treat George W. Bush? How Doe He Compare To Other Presidents?

[Guest]

In publishing this letter, I do not expect a reply, nor do I wish to initiate a debate. I simply want to go "on the record" with my deep feelings on this issue.

I voted for George W. Bush the first time, but not for his re-election. Initially, he said all the right things. He was a man of integrity and faith and promised the same from his administration. He had been successful as a governor in bringing opposing factions and political interests together for the overall good of his state. He promised the same for his Presidential administration. He seemed to recognize the problems facing the country--at least he said he did. Initially, I was optimistic for our country and its new leader.

As his administration wore on, it became increasingly clear that his campaign and even inaugural promises were nothing more than empty words. It became readily apparent that what was being said by the President and the key leaders in his administration was the message they wanted us to hear and believe, not necessarily what was true and right.

9/11 revealed his ideology and his willingness to follow that ideology regardless of advice or circumstances. A Congress of his own party proved unwilling to challenge him, seemingly too busy working to satisfy the desires of special interest contributors to their political campaigns. He and his party claimed certain fundamental precepts... and then conducted themselves in a totally opposite manner.

President Bush's two terms proved that many senior members of his administration did not have the morals or integrity that Bush promised at the outset. Almost two dozen of them have been investigated, indicted or convicted of serious offenses. The same is true of the members of Congress of his same party, During the two terms of the Bush presidency, almost 5% of the entire membership of the House and Senate have been investigated, indicted or convicted of serious crimes. The vast majority of those officials were of the President's party.

Yet Bush never wavered in his focus on his fundamental ideaology--attempting to plant democracies around the world, particularly in the Middle East. His narrow focus was at the expense of providing leadership to address longstanding and worsening domestic problems facing the country. Health care, Social Security, Medicare, a badly devaluing U.S, dollar, no action on environmental issues other than those that worsened the world we live in, turning a federal surplus to the largest national debt in the history of the country in only eight years, no effort to create an energy policy even in the face of skyrocketing oil and gas prices, no effective action to address the eroding educational standards of our children, and on and on. As much as I try, I can think of little of a positive nature that has been accomplished by this President, his majority party or the people he chose to play key roles in his administration. Yes, "he" won a two-week invasion-war in Iraq. But then the gross, even criminal, mismanagement of the occupation of both Iraq and Afghanistan in the almost six years since far outweighs the initial accomplishment.

This President has been willing, even totally committed, to spending the country's treasure and sacrificing the lives of thousands of fine young people in the prolonged pursuit of his personal ideology. He will leave office with an economy that is seriously broken, with tens of millions of Americans with no health care, with a military that is frustrated and worn out, with a Congress which has proven no ability or willingness to meet their political adversaries halfway for the good of the country, and having lost the trust and respect of most of the rest of the world. On President Bush's watch, the U.S. changed from a respected world power, with the strongest economy on earth and a series of domestic problems that were definitely solvable, to a country who's reputation, economy and ability to influence world affairs are in serious decline as well as a set of domestic problems that would be difficult to resolve because of inadequate resources and a political will which has been polarized by his leadership.

There is almost no factor by which the Bush administration can be measured in which things are better now than when he took office in 2001. I am convinced his administration will eventually be viewed as one of the most disastrous eight years in the history of our country. I will celebrate the inauguration of his successor, whichever candidate that might be. Whether it be John McCain or Barack Obama, either of them could hardly do worse.

[Guest]

AMEN!!!!!

[Guest]

::) Yeah, he's been just "terrible".

PRESIDENT BUSH'S AMAZING ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Abortion & Traditional Values

1. Banned Partial Birth Abortion — by far the most significant roll-back of abortion on demand since Roe v. Wade.

2. Reversed Clinton's move to strike Reagan's anti-abortion Mexico Policy.

3. By Executive Order (EO), reversed Clinton's policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act.

4. By EO, prohibited federal funds for international family planning groups that provide abortions and related services.

5. Upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals.

6. Made $33 million available for abstinence education programs in 2004.

7. Supports the Defense of Marriage Act — and a Constitutional amendment saying marriage is between one man and one woman.

8. Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents.

9. Requires districts to let students transfer out of dangerous schools.

10. Requires schools to have a zero-tolerance policy for classroom disruption (reintroducing discipline into classrooms).

11. Signed the Teacher Protection Act, which protects teachers from lawsuits related to student discipline.

12. Expanded the role of faith-based and community organizations in after-school programs.

Much more can be found here - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1163304/posts


You speak of Bush's morals and yet; he wasn't sued for sexual harrassment, accused of rape or impeached like Clinton. Yet Clinton left office with a 65% approval rating. ::)

The Clinton Legacy - http://www.prorev.com/legacy.htm

[Guest]

I guess it's like baseball. You can have a 20-year career in the major leagues with decent stats, but if you were not a darling of the press, you get ignored in the hall-of-fame balloting.

People only remember what they want to remember, and rarely want to their heroes bashed or their villains exonerated - regardless of the facts.

[Guest]

Waddaya thinkin when you say you're not inviting any responses. This is TV you're talking to!! You should know by now that it doesn't matter how many death warrants our President has signed in the Middle East and elsewhere or how many other mistakes of commission or omission he's made. It doesn't matter if he may be the dumbest, least visionary or most undiplomatic President in history. G.W. Bush is a hero to many who think the place they share with him is the highest moral ground. When you're in that special high place it's ok, and maybe even a moral imperative, to hate , discriminate against, and even kill those who occupy the places below you. If you think the first response you got with a contrary view sounded a little angry, just wait. You are about to get it with both barrels. And since you put your smiling face out there with your thoughts, I'm not sure you should go outside for awhile.

(ps: your comments were as good a summation a few short paragraphs can be!)

[Guest]

When you're in that special high place it's ok, and maybe even a moral imperative, to hate , discriminate against, and even kill those who occupy the places below you.

Speaking of "killing those who occupy the places below you"

Bill Clinton - ARKANSAS SUDDEN DEATH SYNDROME

- Number of persons in the Clinton machine orbit who are alleged to have committed suicide: 9
- Number known to have been murdered: 12
- Number who died in plane crashes: 6
- Number who died in single car automobile accidents: 3
- Number of one-person sking fatalities: 1
- Number of key witnesses who have died of heart attacks while in federal custody under questionable circumstances: 1
- Number of unexplained deaths: 4
- Number of northern Mafia killings during peak years of 1968-78: 30
- Number of Dixie Mafia killings during same period: 156

[Guest]

I don't understand your post Puterguru. Are you honestly trying to say that The Clintons are somehow responsible for these deaths? Really? Is that what you're trying to say.

Can you name the 4,000 plus that died under the Bush/Cheney regime?

[Guest]

Kahuna, an eloquent post, and a gutsy one too, given this crowd. As you mentioned, its the lack of action on major issues such as health care, the economy, the environment, the subprime mortgage crisis, etc., that has defined his presidency. And to my mind, turning the surplus into national debt is just criminal.

[Guest]

"Yet Bush never wavered in his focus on his fundamental ideaology--attempting to plant democracies around the world, particularly in the Middle East."

I am confused. When Palestine elected a government that he did not want, he immediately went into attack mode, doing everything he could to punish the people of Palestine for electing the party that we did not want.

In Haiti, the administration was so opposed to their democratically elected president that we went in there when there was political tension and physically kidnapped their president (the Marines did), forced him on a plane, and dropped him off in South Africa.

I thought democracies were things were the people in the country were able to determine who their leadership is, and once determined the rest of the world worked with them until the new elections (or at least the ones that support democracy).

Further, you need to read freedmen. He met with Bush and Bush, Rummy, Wolfowitz, and a lot of others are devout believers in his economics. Did I say that Freedmen assembled the economic advisory team for Pinochet? I hate to say this, but this was never about democracy (we have always hated democracy abroad), this is about economics, and it did NOT work.

[Guest]

Sung to the tune of the Beverly Hillbillies

Texas Hillbillies

Come and listen to my story 'bout a boy name Bush.
His IQ was zero and his head was up his tush.
He drank like a fish while he was drivin' all about.
But that didn't matter 'cuz his daddy bailed him out.

DUI, that is. Criminal record. Cover-up.

Well, the first thing you know little Georgie goes to Yale.
He can't spell his name but they never let him fail.
He spends all his time hangin' out with student folk.
And that's when he learns how to snort a line of coke.

Blow, that is. White gold. Nose candy.

The next thing you know there's a war in Vietnam.
Kin folks say, "George, stay at home with Mom."
Let the common people get maimed and scarred.
We'll buy you a spot in the Texas Air Guard.

Cushy, that is. Country clubs. Nose candy.

Twenty years later George gets a little bored.
He trades in the booze, says that Jesus is his Lord.
He said, "Now the White House is the place I wanna be."
So he called his daddy's friends and they called the GOP.

Gun owners, that is. Falwell. Jesse Helms.

Come November 7, the election ran late.
Kin folks said "Jeb, give the boy your state!"
"Don't let those colored folks get into the polls."
So they put up barricades so they couldn't punch their holes.

Chads, that is. Duval County. Miami-Dade.

Before the votes were counted five Supremes stepped in.
Told all the voters "Hey, we want George to win."
"Stop counting votes!" was their solemn invocation.
And that's how George finally got his coronation.

Rigged, that is. Illegitimate. No moral authority.

Y'all go vote now. Ya hear?

[Guest]

1rnfl 1rnfl 1rnfl 1rnfl 1rnfl Oh, this is priceless! And every word is true! Great post. :bigthumbsup:

[Guest]

:agree: :agree: :agree: Great one, JJ.

[Guest]

Some how I believe kahuna really knew what he would ignite on this forum with 'W' as the subject matter.

I wonder how previous war time Presidents....any war.....any President....would have fared had there been an equivalent media 24/7 as well as network news to amplify the partisan negative only aspects of quite frankly EVERYTHING. Some of them racked up deaths in the hundreds of thousands.

Having personally dealt with the press, I find their ethics and standards unacceptable. When they are willing tell you their goal is to be first not necessarily factual. Add to that the current political bias and what is the result? Doesn't matter. They hold ALL the cards. They can and do dwell on the less than one percent issue to the point where it is aired as a National crisis....the sub prime lending and foreclosure rates for example. What they tell you....foreclosures are up 54% over a year ago....what they don't tell you is foreclosures as a percent of total mortgages is less than 2%. Ditto the sub prime market....represents significantly less than 5% of total mortgages. Put the media amplifier/multiplier on these two and the sky is falling.

What does this have to do with the thread at hand....I kinda, sorta get the impression folks don't do much research and are merely one for one amplifiers of the media's digest and thinking. I don't argue the right for one to agree with the media.....only a more in depth understanding of the subject than the media requires.

As for 'W' it's a good thing the socioeconomic balance is tipping the wrong way during his last 6 months to add more fodder to the cannons!!!

As you probably know, I totally do not have the time of day for partisan pandering....and absolutely no use for media parroting....AND I do not subscribe to bashing a President for all that is done..why not? Well, do you remember the other 544 in Washington who are there helping him attain/hinder the results.....

That is my $8.95 worth (two cents adjusted for media induced economic depression)

BTK

[Guest]

I'm sorry, BTK. Maybe I'm not understanding. Are you saying our economy is not in trouble and that somehow the media has blown this out of proportion? Maybe it hasn't hit you, but it certainly has hit hundreds of thousands of others. I would love to hear what the the folks at GE or the AA pilots or the thousands and thousands of others losing jobs would have to say. What exactly do you mean by "media induced economic depression"? I'm really baffled. :dontknow:

As for Bush, IMHO, you can't buy intelligence and you can't hide stupid for long. So, to me, he became very transparent.

[Guest]

you can't hide stupid for long.

You certainly got that one right.

Democrats complain that this President has done nothing about health care, yet in the same sentence say that he has wasted our surplus. Where in the world do you think money for a national health care program is going to come from? Selling girl scout cookies maybe? Or I suppose we should just tax the upper class some more, people who have worked hard to get where they are, to pay for someone elses health care? What previous pesident has done anything about health care, none. That doesn't matter though, it's all George W Bush's fault.

Democrats complain about the "4000 lives lost" in this war, but fail to mention the lives saved because of President Bush's anti-abortion stance. Oh wait a minute, those aren't lives, those are "Choices". ::)

I'm done, it's no use. Some people will see only what they want to see.

[Guest]

Under the Lincoln administration over 600,000 lives were lost in war. Yet he is considered a "great" President. Go figure.

[Guest]

I guess I have a propensity to want to talk about the in excess of the 90% who are still employed and that they and their companies deserve some visibility.

My point is the media certainly is not going to spend one millisecond accentuating the positive. That is my point.

And I guess 'W' is doing a good job the last couple of days since oil is down and the market is up!!!!!! Just kidding, but since he gets credit for the downside....who gets the credit for the upside. I really don't care about ones plumbing (male or female), dem or republican, black, yellow or tan or in between. Just a fair shake on the facts.

There is no confusion if one only wants to dwell on the statistical minority status of almost any subject.

Foe example (again) the foreclosure crisis.....it represents less than 2% of total mortgages.
It does include those who bought second homes when they were not qualified to do so and the permissive pacifist mentality is dawdling with how to bail them out. How about those struggling every day and making their commitments as signed up for. What do they get......furthering the media inspired crisis is how the media focuses on the significant increase in foreclosure rates ....up 52% over last year. It totally ignores the 98% who are not in foreclosure. The sub prime market is less than 1% of the total lending that is in place, but to listen to the media one would have to conclude we are all in jeopardy.

That is what I mean about media induced....of course we can drop down to the individuals who have innocently been caught in the manipulating by the lenders and the borrowers taking advantage of the booming market.

The media is not telling the public who should not worry and why about their bank deposits...they only focus on the individual who may be caught in a given situation because it sensationalizes the issue....has nothing to do with the masses.

My references have no partisan bent what so ever.....I detest putting the party first.
For me it is country first party and all else distant seconds.....AND THAT IS NOT WHAT THE MEDIA PEDDLES!!!!!!!

My $9.35 worth (two cents adjusted for media induced inflation).

BTK :)

[Guest]

Excellent post and all true whether the masses believe it or not!!

[Guest]

We'll see what the masses think in November. And Puterguru, for once we agree. To quote you "Some people only see what they want to see."

Just my $4.97 worth (2 cents adjusted for Bush's disastrous economic strategies).

[Guest]

It never ceases to amaze me how much "power" folk believe the President has.

He submits a budget, Congress chews it up, and then gives what Congress wants to.
He gets money from Congress, but cannot spend it except on what Congress has authorized.
He must report EVERYTHING (someday y'all need to try to identify all of the reports the Executive Branch - every office/department/agency - must provide Congress on what's going on, done, and planned).
He has term limits, while some Congresspersons have 40-50+ years in office.

The President is not a monarch or dictator, yet if you follow many posts it would seem the President controls how much sunshine will beam from the sky and everything else as well. Also, it's amazing how many people seem to WANT the President to be the Santa Claus of their lives and control everything.

How strange!

[Guest]

You certainly got that one right.

Democrats complain that this President has done nothing about health care, yet in the same sentence say that he has wasted our surplus. Where in the world do you think money for a national health care program is going to come from? Selling girl scout cookies maybe?

The money would obviously have come from the billions we are spending in Iraq.

[Guest]

The money would obviously have come from the billions we are spending in Iraq.

The money would have come from taxpayers. If taxpayers want something and are willing to fund it, then taxes are levied and the monies provided. There is no magic money fountain. The only money the Government has is what We, The People throw into the kitty.

When politicians ask "how are we going to pay for a tax cut?" I get ticked off. We PAY for oblligations and expenditures by taxes. If we cut taxes, all that means is the govenrment has less money to play with, and must cut obligations and expenditures accordingly. That's not rocket science - that's plain and simple money management. There is too much pork now, and the pig can afford to go on a diet now and then.

The idea that the dipping into people's pockets can continue at a certain level because they are used to it, and the government can take any unoblilgated money and spend it like a teenager who just found a $20 bill on the ground is ridilculous.

[Guest]

The money would obviously have come from the billions we are spending in Iraq.

Well there was no war with the Clinton administration and yet still no health care yet I don't see anyone complaining about him, why, because he's a Democrat of course! Secondly we already pay enough in entitlements. Why should I have to pay for someone else's health care is beyond me. That's part of the American dream. Get crappy job making hardly any money and no health care. Realize your barely making it and can't afford to go to the doctor, a little light bulb should then come on in your head "hey maybe I should go to school or learn a trade so that I can get a better job that pays more and has health care"

That's how it is suppose to work. If it were up to Democrats however thru income distributon minimum wage would be $20 an hour and everyone would have fantastic health care. All of it paid for of course by the people who decided to get an education and a good paying job.

Sorry it just doesn't work that way.

[Guest]

First, health care reform is not a partisan issue. Who cares what past administrations did or did not do, the fact is that reform is needed. There are numerous reasons why people may not have health care coverage and they all don't fall into the "...go to school get a better job" category.
For example,
• Today, 47 million people in our country have no health coverage—including 8.7 million children—and these numbers are going up. In 2013, if we don’t change things, 56 million of us will be uninsured.
Retirees especially are losing employer-sponsored health care:
• Only half the employers who provided retiree health coverage in 2000 are still providing it
today—a 50 percent drop in seven years. (see link below for reference)

You can go to school, get the best of jobs, retire then lose the health care benefits you thought were guaranteed as part of your retirement package - just what happened this past week with GM retirees over age 65.

Are they supposed to go back to school and get a better job?

http://www.aflcio.org/issues/healthcare/survey/index.cfm?source=hc_survey_aflciosite

[Guest]

Under the Lincoln administration over 600,000 lives were lost in war. Yet he is considered a "great" President. Go figure.


Its not the cost of a war, it is the reasons it is fought. Lincoln was defending the idea of a nation of united states, and he was a republican (the liberal party of his time) who had just driven out the wigs (the conservatives of their time). He had progressive ideas that eventually led to the emancipation of slaves. To be honest, I would have fought in that one (there are a few others). But to kill Americans over some stupid economic experiment to see if Milton Friedman's Chicago School of economics could actually work is (if you ask me) criminal.

[Guest]

Quote from: SteveZ on Today at 10:47:38 AM
It never ceases to amaze me how much "power" folk believe the President has.

If you take GWB and add Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, John Ellis "Jeb" Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Norman Podhoretz, J. Danforth Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel & Paul Wolfowitz, you have a very powerful and criminal organization. These were the signers of the Project for the New American Century. They believed America should become an empire and control the world and its resources. In order to have a military which would be powerful enough to be and continue as the sole superpower a new Pearl Harbor would be just what was needed and required to get the support of the American people.

The media is for the most part owned and controlled by Rupert Murdoch which explains why Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Riley can be such big stars when their strong supporters are such a small minority.

[Guest]

Well there was no war with the Clinton administration and yet still no health care yet I don't see anyone complaining about him, why, because he's a Democrat of course! Secondly we already pay enough in entitlements. Why should I have to pay for someone else's health care is beyond me. That's part of the American dream. Get crappy job making hardly any money and no health care. Realize your barely making it and can't afford to go to the doctor, a little light bulb should then come on in your head "hey maybe I should go to school or learn a trade so that I can get a better job that pays more and has health care"

That's how it is suppose to work. If it were up to Democrats however thru income distributon minimum wage would be $20 an hour and everyone would have fantastic health care. All of it paid for of course by the people who decided to get an education and a good paying job.

Sorry it just doesn't work that way.


Yes, that's how it's supposed to be. I haven't seen this much "fluff" since the Donna Reed Show. Get real!

[Guest]

The issues mentioned in this thread are much too complex to be discusses so lightly.
The post from junglejim reminds me of the mytical Trilateral Commission of the 50's/60's where Rockefeller was accused to want to dominate the world. It is absurd. America, wanted or not is the only major player in the world today (as a single country) and all those insults and critics come with the job. I will like to see Mother Russia in this position and see how wil they do, or a Real Squizofrenic case like Venezuela's Chavez trying to unified Latin Americn behind him by showering them with the Venezuelan peoples oil, in the mean time Venezuela is in shambles with robbery, kidnapping, drugs, deep social and economic problems, hunger and lack of medical care, in a country that is inundated with dollars from oil. Or go to countries in Europe where the medicine is socialized and you have to wait years for a procedure, besides you can only go to the clinic and doctors assigned to you with no recourse to change. WE ARE THE LUCKIEST PEOPLE ON THE WORLD, and still complaining. power in this country is in the hands of the Pentagon, the Multinationals, Wall Street and big money. this is my understanding

[Guest]

Did I just read back a post or two that the media is controlled by Rupert Murdoch? That is just too funny! Sen. McCain goes to the middle east and no one notices. Sen. Obama goes to the middle east and the three news anchors, Brian, Charlie and Katy, all travel along with him. Tell me the media is not in the tank for Obama! Bernie Goldberg is indeed correct.

[Guest]

[b]in the mean time Venezuela is in shambles with robbery, kidnapping, drugs, deep social and economic problems, hunger and lack of medical care, in a country that is inundated with dollars from oil. Or go to countries in Europe where the medicine is socialized and you have to wait years for a procedure, besides you can only go to the clinic and doctors assigned to you with no recourse to change.


What planet are you on?!?!?! You need to turn Fox news off and buy a plane ticket. Take it from a person who HAS traveled. Every time I hear someone go off like that, it makes you look like you listen to Rush too much because the people living over there totally disagree. Take Chavez for example. He has been able to reduce poverty on a steady rate of 25% per year and has the popular support of the people (as much as Reagan did here). He has internationally supervised elections, freedom of speech, and the people have to approve any government actions through democratic elections. You know why Fox news hates Venezuela. Because it is a democracy that has not elected right wing nuts who only care about 'corporate interests'. In the sense of democracy, it is much more democratic than we are. Turn off Fox, they give a distorted and incorrect picture of the world. Simply put, you are factually incorrect.

And, btw, everyone I have spoken to a lot of people from Europe and they say that there are some problems with the health care, but they would NOT give it up for our system. And the only reason we don't have to wait here is because 1/4 of this nation is not allowed ANY health care. I would gladly wait an extra 15 minutes if it meant that all my neighbors had access too. But I understand that republicans have this superiority complex where they don't value all human life as equal (that is unless you are 3 cells big and living in a rape victims stomach).

[Guest]

Hey No. 6 I thought I was the only one that noted the media bias... :joke: It is just shy of blatant!!

And there was mention above some where in this thread about fluff.......

BTK

[Guest]

Did I just read back a post or two that the media is controlled by Rupert Murdoch? That is just too funny! Sen. McCain goes to the middle east and no one notices. Sen. Obama goes to the middle east and the three news anchors, Brian, Charlie and Katy, all travel along with him. Tell me the media is not in the tank for Obama! Bernie Goldberg is indeed correct.


Oh, they did big coverage on McCain's visit to the Marketplace in Iraq. Remember, "It's so safe. Like a walk in the park!" As he wore full body armor, was surrounded by over 100 U.S. soldiers and 20 helicopters overhead. ***And less then a month later, that entire marketplace was demolished by a suicide bomber.

McCain is not muzzled by advisers and kept out of the lens because he really doesn't want to viewed up close and personal. I can understand why.

[Guest]

Oh, they did big coverage on McCain's visit to the Marketplace in Iraq. Remember, "It's so safe. Like a walk in the park!" As he wore full body armor, was surrounded by over 100 U.S. soldiers and 20 helicopters overhead. ***And less then a month later, that entire marketplace was demolished by a suicide bomber.

McCain is not muzzled by advisers and kept out of the lens because he really doesn't want to viewed up close and personal. I can understand why.

I'm not sure if Sen. McCain's comment was sincere or satire - I guess you had to be there. Sound bites are almost always taken out of context, or at least that what Sen. Obama claims.

If the election is won or lost on sound bites, that just means a significant percentage of American voters need daily doses of ritalin. There's a lot more about both of the candidates than the quickie blast on the screen where the news anchor gets more exposure than the event.

[Guest]

Sorry, Steve, but you're dead wrong on this one. This was not a sound bite. McCain then appeared in several interviews after his trip touting how safe Iraq was. Check it out.

[Guest]

Sorry, Steve, but you're dead wrong on this one. This was not a sound bite. McCain then appeared in several interviews after his trip touting how safe Iraq was. Check it out.

I take your word for it.

However, Sen. McCain's opinion, or any other Senator's for that matter, on how secure or not secure any part of Iraq may be is irrelevant. The only opinions concerning "security" that matter are those formed by the persons who live there full-time and those who have been assigned there multiple times since this started. For those who only view the place long-distance, it is still conjecture.

[Guest]

I agree Steve, but, McCain did already try to sell the American public a bill of goods.
As President, the stakes are higher. We've been down that "used-car" salesman path before.

[Guest]

I agree Steve, but, McCain did already try to sell the American public a bill of goods.
As President, the stakes are higher. We've been down that "used-car" salesman path before.

Show me a politician that is not in the "used car salesman" business and I'll show you a politician without a campaign manager, publicist, make-up artist, speech-writer(s), image consultant, media consultant and food taster.