[Americathy]

I love this guy's down home style of writing. He used to be on the radio but if he still is, he's not in my neck of the woods. Article is pretty long.

[Maria S]

"I love this guy's down home style of writing. He used to be on the radio but if he still is, he's not in my neck of the woods."


I'm with you! I used to be able to listen to Barry on the radio...loved hearing him. Now we're stuck with Doug Stephan (or cattle futures).

[risk]

My only comment is to suggest that the author ask why this single issue has to be an issue for the other party? They could lead out in other ways, but they choose this one to drag through the mud. The answer is that the other party is usually wrong anyway, and has done much to put us in the situation we're already in today. Pelosi says the troops weren't well enough equipped and there weren't enough of them to deploy in Iraq. Well just who might we blame for that? Democrats. One thing leads to another and a writer like Barry Farber has to admit that Republicans are better at a lot of other things, as well. Just look at Ronald Reagan and George Bush senior for exmaples. When compared to Clinton and Carter, the differences are stark.

[HankReardon]

WMD's have been found, are being found and will be continually be found in Iraq. The Iraq Saddam Hussein regime has been involved exstensively with Al Qaida, from allowing Al Qaida terrorist training camps, to providing legitimate state sponsored passports, to being directly involved in attacks against America, Americans and American intersts, especially the events of September 11th, 2001. What? Is this guy to lazy to research this? Has the constant repeating of the "Bush lied there was no WMD's, no Al Qaida-Iraq connection" propaganda from the leftist anti-American Democrats and media worked so well on this conservative? Shameful!

[GBA]

Can anyone explain this: "lousy Republican stewardship over the wetlands". I know it's a standard part of Democrat hyperbole, but is there any truth to that charge?

[arthurus]

The one group he doesn't speak to here and cannot speak to is are the liberals whose overriding belief is that America is the source of all the evils in the world and deserves destruction. Unfortunately that feeling is the ground that undergirds the environmental, social, and economic beliefs of a great many liberals. They want to save the wetlands and may even see that only if W is reelected will they continue to be able to fight for the snail darter, still, they feel deep inside that it is better if America does not survive, wetlands or no wetlands.

[Lazamataz]

We are at war! Dammit, don t you understand? We are at WAR!

It's a low-grade form of war. It's not even as intense as Vietnam.

[1903A3]

This election boils down to one thing
SURVIVAL
With GWB we have a good chance of achieving that ( no certitude however for nothing is certain in war )
With Al-Querry we might as well slit our throat's ourselves for the difference it will make

[MissAmericanPie]

He's cute, but we are facing just as big a "civilization ending" invasion right in our own nation that is being ignored by both parties.

To earn the respect and support of people of principle, a president must have principle. Bush is doing fine in the WOT, and yet for all his claims that a military cannot protect an American border, troops have been sent to guard the borders of Iraq. His numbers began a big decline after his amnesty speech, I don't know what can be pulled out of the magic hat to bring them up before Nov.

[tnlibertarian]

This reminded me of our conversation from last week.

[sweetliberty]

"Under President Bush, at least, they have to keep worrying we'll start getting them right."

Very good article.