Does Bush talk about ANYTHING besides.....

[Guest NoCalMike]

Every single day whether I am watching CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC etc.....just about every show is interrupted to go to a live speech from the President and EVERY SINGLE time it is just about the same speech he has been giving for the last 8 months. First off, why do we need to hear this everyday, and secondly, is ANYTHING DIFFERENT on Bush's mind than going to war with Iraq? It's almost inevitable that we are going to war right after the holidays, the lame resolution has made sure of that, but I just bet Iraq is on it's heels considering the "great job" we did hunting down bin ladin. I seriously want to know what other issues Bush would like to discuss and debate having to do with ANYTHING BESIDES Iraq.....

[Guest EricMM]

Um, he can also lower environmental standards... across the board... because somehow it will be good for our nation...

 

Go Bush!

[Guest redbaron51]

because Bush is cleaning up what daddy left for him.

[Guest DragonflyKid]

He's like Captin Ahab from Moby Dick with Saddam of course being Moby Dick. Bush's dad's hurt pride over not finishing the job in Iraq is akin to Captin Ahab losing part of his leg. It eats away at the pres, "Have you seen a paunch, moustachioed Iraqi?, no, well you're no help to me then."

[Guest Ozymandias]

He's like Captin Ahab from Moby Dick with Saddam of course being Moby Dick. Bush's dad's hurt pride over not finishing the job in Iraq is akin to Captin Ahab losing part of his leg. It eats away at the pres, "Have you seen a paunch, moustachioed Iraqi?, no, well you're no help to me then."

That's downright ABSURD. How dare you imply that this is soleley because of Daddy's "hurt pride"?!! (you're forgetting about Cheney and Powell's hurt pride since they were #2 & #3 in command during said war).

[Guest El Satanico]

Well if Texas was still in the running he may have brought up "dat der BSC mess with dem der computer doohickeys"

[Guest El Satanico]

Well if Texas was still in the running he may have brought up "dat der BSC mess with dem der computer doohickeys"

[Guest LooseCannon]

I don't think it has anything to do with hurt pride. Bush Sr decided not to go after Saddam when he could have. Why would that sting anyone's pride? Saddam's just a convenient scapegoat is all.

[Guest DrTom]

Bush Sr. did not go after Saddam, despite his advisors encouraging him to do so, because Desert Storm's repeatedly-stated purpose was "the liberation of Kuwait." Kuwait was free, so our job was done. Had it been called "the punishment of Iraq," then Bush could have justified it easily.

 

I think he should have done it when he had the chance, but it was his call to make, and I doubt he has any "hurt pride" over a decision he made in good faith and good conscience.

 

Perhaps the current President Bush talks about Iraq a lot because it's on the minds of many Americans, and a frequent topic for reporters to ask about?

[Guest JHawk]

Bush Sr. did not go after Saddam, despite his advisors encouraging him to do so, because Desert Storm's repeatedly-stated purpose was "the liberation of Kuwait." Kuwait was free, so our job was done. Had it been called "the punishment of Iraq," then Bush could have justified it easily.

 

I think he should have done it when he had the chance, but it was his call to make, and I doubt he has any "hurt pride" over a decision he made in good faith and good conscience.

 

Perhaps the current President Bush talks about Iraq a lot because it's on the minds of many Americans, and a frequent topic for reporters to ask about?

Because I can't tell you the number of times I've been having sex with one of my groupies--er, with the love of my life and thought "I'd probably enjoy this more if we got Iraq out of the way."

 

In all seriousness though, it seems like everytime a president is experiencing even a slight dip in popularity, then all of a sudden they try to drum up support by using Iraq as a scapegoat. Even Clinton tried it, and I think he was met by a round of apathy as well.

[Guest Ozymandias]

In all seriousness though, it seems like everytime a president is experiencing even a slight dip in popularity, then all of a sudden they try to drum up support by using Iraq as a scapegoat. Even Clinton tried it, and I think he was met by a round of apathy as well.

 

Ho-ho no, he bombed Iraq to deflect attention away from the Blewinsky vote in the House. In one of the only sane moments at the time Trent Lott said of it, "This is more of an impeachable offense than what we're investigating". But he, nor the Republicans, went after Clinton on it.

Which is a shame because that is something they actually COULD have gotten him on - that combined with his attack on the Sudan earlier that year to deflect attention from the Paula Jones case. But hey, I guess his sex life was more important to the GOP than war crimes.

 

Tom: GB Sr. could have justified it just as easily because in people's minds at the time that WAS "The punishment of Iraq". It's not just a terrible call in retrospect, it's a terrible call even then. Once you've gone that far, you don't just leave a violent lunatic in power who is only going to be infinitely angrier at us.

[Guest LooseCannon]

Ho-ho no, he bombed Iraq to deflect attention away from the Blewinsky vote in the House. In one of the only sane moments at the time Trent Lott said of it, "This is more of an impeachable offense than what we're investigating". But he, nor the Republicans, went after Clinton on it.

But gosh, where was all the outrage that someone spoke out against a president's use of force? I thought we were all supposed to blindly and reflexively unite behind our president in a zombie-like manner whenever he used the military to advance American interests.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

On Hardball tonight a writer for Vanity Fair said that he talked to people inside the Justice Department and they have proof that Iraq worked with Al Qaeda. He never said they played a role in 9/11, but it was something I thought I'd mention.

[Guest MarvinisaLunatic]

Perhaps the current President Bush talks about Iraq a lot because it's on the minds of many Americans, and a frequent topic for reporters to ask about?

I for one don't care about it that much anymore. If Bush wants to attack Iraq and remove Saddam from power, then there is nothing that any joe average citizen is going to do about it and it does no good to complain about it. I just hope that any troops that get sent over there for this foolishness don't get killed or end up getting sick like they did 10 years ago.

 

In two years, hopefully Bush's ignoring the real issues that people have (which are thousands of miles away from Iraq in his own backyard so to speak) will backfire and cost him the election, but somehow I doubt it.

[Guest LooseCannon]

On Hardball tonight a writer for Vanity Fair said that he talked to people inside the Justice Department and they have proof that Iraq worked with Al Qaeda. He never said they played a role in 9/11, but it was something I thought I'd mention.

Was it Christopher Hitchens? If so, I'd take his word, and he's not exactly someone that would be eager to help the Bush administration.

[Guest NoCalMike]

I think Bush learned from his Dad. Bush41, got us into war with Iraq and his approval rating soared through the roof, but after the war his politics on the homefront failed horribly and his ratings plummeted to the abyss. So I think Dubya, will just decide to go with what works and just stretch this war over his whole term, that way he NEVER has to talk about anything else ever.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

Was it Christopher Hitchens? If so, I'd take his word, and he's not exactly someone that would be eager to help the Bush administration.

I'm not sure who it was. But I doubt Vanity Fair has alot of pro-Bush people working for them.