Replies

On a slightly different tack, I think the war effort, and especially the setbacks and difficulties, would be better received if Bush imitated Churchill in the respect of constantly warning of how difficult the road ahead will be, talking frankly about the obstacles, the efforts to frustrate Iraqi freedom by Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and others. Openly accuse the bad guys. Promise to remain steadfast to our friends through thick and thin.

Good point. And not just Bush. I think the only person that has been consistent in saying this is Rice.

If Kerrey would have taken this tact.. I think Bush would be defeated, but instead it's clear he wants to jump ship and then we are back to square one (or worse).

The GOP desperately needed coherent and organized talking points throughout the last year, and were nearly left defenseless as the bar was defined and raised by the weasel left - delivery of stockpiles of Iraqi WMD, or else.

Now, either the GOP is performing (still) the rope-a-dope of the century and are sitting on WMD stockpiles or equivalent, or more likely they were left with their pants around their ankles and mouths open. And so were we in their defense. The Bush administration completely lost control of the issue in the public domain.

Of course, there were innumerable reasons to take out Saddam irrespective of WMD, but I wonder did this administration get setup?

And how did they permit the 'discovery of WMD stockpiles' to be allowed to judge all measurement of success in Iraq in the first place? And why didn't they change the premise quickly?

The repair of this public relations disaster is going to be slow and ugly, even with a Bush mandate in November.

I still don't believe they've seized control of the issue, particularly on the world stage.

Bush has, imitated Churchill, talking about how difficult the days ahead are going to be. And, was as usual, ignored by the MSM, as far as reporting his message in a fair and balanced story, that is.