Dream...on.

"Bush needs help. Now. Here's hoping he doesn't get any."

What, you're hoping things go worse in Iraq? You're hoping for higher oil prices? Just what is it that you're "hoping" for? More dead americans...or just higher deficits?

You need to pause and check yourself.

Scott,

There's a little logical fallacy called a straw man argument. What one does is make up an argument, attribute it to your opponent and attack away. That's what you just did. Nowhere, not anywhere--did I say that I hope that "things go worse in Iraq" or "higher oil prices" or "more dead Americans." What I am hoping for is that President Bush isn't capable of carrying through his runious policy of higher deficits, less environmental protection, of the state meddling in our personal affairs, of using the government as a personal propaganda tool, of lying to the American people, or of the subversion of just about everything that is good and right about this great nation of ours.

I don't need to hope for higher deficits. Bush's don't tax and spend plan has guarenteed it. I don't need to hope for things to go bad in Iraq. They did long ago, much to my regret. I don't have to hope for dead Americans--Bush has already provided us with those with his policies designed more for political gain than for the good of our nation.

It is the President who needs to pause and check himself. I think it would also be good if every person who voted for him to pause and check themselves.

I expect more of you Scott. Please don't repeat the disengenous arguments of Republicans who play fast and loose with facts relating to Social Security, the War in Iraq, and almost everything else they talk about. I never said a single thing you suggested. Not a one. But you hoped to score a cheap rhetorical point more appropriate for arguments between young children, not adults.

Fair enough on the "cheap rhetorical point". But...

"...with his policies designed more for political gain than for the good of our nation."

So...his policies are designed for political gain, yet he's got no political gain. I think you're contradicting yourself.

In other words, if his policies are so unpopular, as you post above, then perhaps he's doing what he does because he thinks it's right, not because he thinks he's going to get "political gain." You can't have it both ways.

Not a contradiction. Selling out for cheap cheers never works. Doesn't stop Bush from doing it though--See "Flying home from vacation for the first time to sign the Schiavo legislation."

Yes, he flew home to sign legislation. That's what Senators, Congressmen and Presidents do. It's called their job. Whether you disagree with them on their method of intervention or intervention period, I think on this issue it'd be nice if people just for once gave people the benefit of the doubt. Maybe, just maybe most people on both sides of the issue are doing what they think is right, not what they think will get them "cheers". --s

Benefit of the doubt? NO WMD. He used up all free passes years ago. Why should I give those I consider a political opponent a free pass? I'm sure Karl Rove is drafting memoranda right now saying "I think we should give the Democrats the benefit of the doubt, at least once."

Also, Bush has NEVER LEFT A VACATION EARLY BEFORE. Ever. See PDB: "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S."

Bush didn't put a big 'ol footprint in the middle of Iraq because of WMD, haven't you folks realized this by now? It was simply ONE of the excuses he used among many for intervention.

But I digress.

I give Clinton and every other Democrat the benefit of the doubt for a. saying there were WMD and post-Clinton b. voting on a resolution to go to war (which by the way, WMD was only PART of the resolution)

Bush didn't do all this by himself, my friend. But in the end, I'm glad he did what he did. It's going to make America and the middleeast peaceful and prosperous and democratic for generations to come, no thanks to nay-sayers as yourself.

And Bush left to SIGN. I guess they could have flown the bill into Crawford. When you folks pick this kind of stuff out, you're going Michael Moore on us and noone cares anymore. You should be talking about the bill, his signature, etc.. not whether he flew home or bringing up the PDB for heaven's sake. Get a new meme.

What I'm arguing is that he has his priorities screwed up. Flys back for this one thing, involing a single person--but not for the PDB. That is an indication that he is more concerned with the political than policy and good government.

The call was a bad one. A court had decided this thing. Florida law was followed in the courts. Perhaps the decision was wrong in some people's eyes--but the court is the body vested with that power. And that's where the error lay.