What is that suppose to mean?
I was drawing an analogy to the McCarthy trick of saying that he had letters in his pocket that proved that somebody was a communist, without actually producing the letters.
I am not a McCarthy basher btw, just bashing that tactic. I am sure that many people find me to be a creep, jerk, fill in the blank. I just think that saying that anonymous people agree with one through freep mail is kinda well uncool.
I do though genuinely apologize for my tone earlier. I am just feeling a sense of frustration with "your side". I do sense that it is becoming un p.c. here to be allowed to criticize the president. I am just venting btw. I still plan on voting for him. I just don't feel that pretending one thinks everything is rosy is not the best long term strategy.
It reminds me of the democrats I know, who would defend Clinton to the hilt, then years later admit that they found him profoundly flawed. I am not comparing Clinton to Bush by this. I am just drawing an analogy.
I am probably being more contrarian than I would typically be, just playing devil's advocate to those who fawn over the president. I detest the Cult of Personality. Doesn't matter who the personality is. Idolatry is one of the 10 commandments that I really get irked at when it is being violated.
If it doesn't apply to you or anybody else reading this, then do not take it personally or offense. I do sense a whiff of this though on the "isn't he so dreamy" threads.
He is a politician, not a pop star. It reminds me of the fawning over Clinton. Again, not comparing their attributes, just comparing the blind allegiance.
Sorry for being so long winded, but I ambushed OhioWFan a bit, and feel a bit counter ambushed, and I feel that some things might be misconstrued.
I was a republican before the president was president, or governor for that matter. Shall be one after he leaves. I see the same thing with Reagan worshippers. Both George Bush's are "no Ronald Reagan" with them. Reagan isn't the idealized Reagan. He made mistakes too. We all do. Come next August, I will be full time attacking the democrats. I just don't want my vote taken for granted, my objections pushed aside for the sake of "unity".
Dick Cheney used to hold my position on Iraq btw. He said that the reason we didn't take out Saddam in 91 was because it would fracture international alliances, be inordinately expensive, would require massive troops, massive money, and the exit strategy would be hard to come up with, with us most likely spending years upon years in country as occupying force with most of the world opposed to us.
Cheney changed his mind. But I would appreciate that those of us who believe he had it right in 1995 when he said that, or when Brent Scowcroft, or the President's own father just last year echoed similar thoughts, would not be treated as parriahs to the cause.
I believe Dick Cheney was dead accurate in fact. Everything that he said would happen if we toppled Saddam has in fact happened. I hope we are still allowed to differ here.
Thanks for/if ya read this long rambling post.
--dogbyte12--