The buck stops at the presidents desk. I cannot wait for this man to be gone.

Given the 2006 election results, I suspect you have more company than you may believe, and that the Dems’ likely error in the next eleven months of the campaign for the White House will be over-confidence (or its cousin, complacency).

Hillary Clinton is polarizing and repellent but the public has gotten used to her in Washington in a more moderate behavior than we were treated to earlier, and I believe the public is going to give her a break this coming election year, and will value her competence over the current President’s ineptitude.

Bill Clinton and Hillary were Dividers. Just as is Bush.

If not more so, given that so much opposition to Bush is irrational and pathological (diseased).

Opposition to the Clintons never was grasped or understood by people well to the left of the US public. (These people failed to see the 1994 election results coming, or realize why they happened, for example.) The opposition to the Clintons was similar to opposition to something tried for a while on ABC’s Monday night football broadcasts. A comedian was added to the play-by-play announcers. There was a large amount of resentment at and loathing of this “info-tainment” gimmick that never was understood by many others, who had no idea what the fuss was all about. The same is true for the Clintons. To this day there are people totally unable (and at times, able but totally unwilling) to understand why so many in this country found them so offensive. In place of understanding they have often substituted fiction and worse.

A democrat for 30 years recently turned Republican I think I am fairly neutral on this.

What happened SBS? Did Somebody Else hit you over the head with a 4×4 or something? ‘Cause, really, only someone with a persistent ringing in their ears could equate legitimate questioning of a crazy war with the war itself.

Bush was elected on the promise to be a uniter and not a divider. There was even rampant speculation he might name a democrat or two for his cabinet. To his credit he did keep Tenet in the CIA. A Clinton Appointee.

Once Barak and Clinton is elected the divisiveness will once again take hold. They are polarizing figures. Someone like Richardson is not. I happen to like Hunter Duncan in the Republican fold. But until a president is elected in which he trully unites by putting Republicans and democrats of a moderate vein into offices and rules by consensus which will never happen because we all know the PARTY runs the candidate.

Obama says the right things but in the end he will be more divisive then any other candidate because he will be run by the DNC. If he is not run by them then he will have Carters type of presidency. A president with values who tried to bypass congress and go to the people which netted him three wars as Bush is facing. A war with the GOP, the DNC and IRAN.

The buck stops at the presidents desk. I cannot wait for this man to be gone. However. All that you posted is the left/Democrats insatiable urge to make Bush pay for not including them in the spoils of war.

Make no mistake about the current state of Affairs. While Bush might not have been the brightest bulb in the White House he has had to fight three wars. Iraq, Afghanistan and Antiwar/Democrats mad for power.

From a neutral perspective. And I really think I am neutral having voted for Kerry and Gore and Clinton twice. A democrat for 30 years recently turned Republican I think I am fairly neutral on this.

I think that This has been one of the most powerful abuses of power BY BOTH sides in history. John Dean screaming antiwar comments. Harry Reid declaring the war lost. On and on it has snowballed into the absolute worst moment in American History. What is going on now is serious finger pointing and somehow the Dems are able to not quite have as big a finger pointed at them as is Bush and the Republicans.

To Wit. Where have all the smart Americans gone? The problem is that the succession of career diplomats carefully grooming themselves for the job are gone. Replaced with Barack Obamas and former first ladies who think they have what it takes to run a complex nation in an insane world.

Things will only get worse unless we vote into office someone like Bill Richardson who has the credentials to put extensive experience and knowledge to use in the White house. Rudi, Barack, Hillary, Huckabee…..they are just pandering to their self indulgent massive egos to have power and have it NOW.

1.
For our enemies, there has never been a better time. The Bush administration is considered so incompetent and so busy avoiding accountability with its own people that literally anything seems possible. While Bush busies his people with stopping the courts from looking at the telecom industry and warantless eavesdropping, Russia is selling nuclear fuel to Iran. While ‘torturegate’ progresses and the Justice department fights tooth and nail to keep the destruction of the tapes away from the White House, Turkey makes nice with Syria, Iran and Jordon in the hopes that together they can see out the destruction of the burgeoning new Kurdistan state in Northern Iraq. While enormous amounts of political energy is spent preventing Judges from knowing who has visited the White House, why seven United States Attorneys were dismissed mid term, who was involved in formulating the administrations energy policy, what happened to the billions of tax payers money sent to Iraq etc, etc… , Pakistan goes boom, North Korea gloats, the Taliban re-group and Al Qaeda continue to go from strength to strength.

2.
For our allies, just endless difficulties, mounting embarrassment, and the unanswered question: Where have all the smart Americans gone?

Bottom line? Military power is simply no match for brain power and, as the above shows, our enemies are running rings around us.

It is precisely why Russia is reverting back to communism. No one alive knows what freedom is all about.

It is why I was opposed to going into Iraq in the first place. Not that I dont believe in Freedom or want them to have it. THEY DONT WANT IT. ITS FOREIGN TO THEM.

I am in no way shape or form in favor of the Iraq war. But I am in favor of making things right. We owe them that. Showing the middle east that we actually do care about their health and well being is an important diplomatic step in a direction that will hopefully spawn individuals to dare challenge Islamic terrorism and its philosophy.

THEY will defeat terrorism. Not the United States.

Just not the military has the experience problem. The diplomates, the political types, the civil servants trying to to rebuilding projects, development projects, etc are only there for a year or less. Everyone has to learn how the things work and get over their preconceived notions.

Also, being there for short periods of time means that no political appointee will take a long term view since why do something that the next guy is going to receive the credit.

An example would be the U.S. military has been in Korea for 50 years but only on one year tours. One year tours makes everyone conservative since there is not enough time to make major changes. About all that can be done in one year is to reorganize the wiring diagram and redo the procedures manual.

An excellent point that I will hone to a finer edge: It takes about as long as a 15-month combat tour to be completely up to speed on how to face down insurgents. It takes an insurgent far less time to adapt to the new trooper.

One question to answer is how any government can make long term plans when the personnel turn over at such a high rate. Does anyone really believe that in some future Obama or Clinton Administration that the same turnover of personnel will not occur?