(Not from Capitol Hill Blue...)
Yahoo! News - Poll Suggests Bush Support Has Grown
Yahoo! News - Bush Gets Boost From McCain on Iraq
Yahoo! News - Russia Says It Warned U.S. Saddam Planned to Attack
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Mareseatoatsanddoeseatoatsbutlittlelambseativy.
5 comments:
This Putin thing is well timed don't you think...
Oh, and from the link you posted...
"His (approval) ratings were 44 percent in interviewing done before ... and went up to 50 percent after Reagan's death."
So it confirms what CapHillBlue said. Have polls maintained this edge since the poll cited? We don't know. What was happening before Reagan's death that was hurting Bush, has that stopped?
Why are you so bent on hating CapHillBlue Matt?
Though the McCain thing is so not good.
Bush can't lose. I know Bush won't lose, but it may be he won't have to play that card. Obviously he has other cards to play.
How utterly obscene is it that Putin says that Russia warned the US. Not to mention that it was actually printed. The only reasonable response to such a statement is the sudden report of a gun shot delivered to the utterer.
Note however, that Bush did not attack Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia: we defined, he refined, and then attacked a bad guy and the effects in the middle east will be totally profound. He has toppled (well, that part was easy) a government and changed the order of things. (Pity Clinton didn't lead that one: the Dems would be in office. Even engaging Afghanistan would have secured a victory for Gore. But Clinton did not want Gore to win: Gore had repudiated Clinton.)
However, success could prove his undoing: if the "war" is over, then, safe in harbor, the citizens could cast him out. Then, ah then: Bush won't lose.
Bushes current policy on Iraq is quite correct: he has set a date for serious disengagement. McCain cannot do anything BUT support that policy. The election, (the one that Bush won't lose) will be a referendum on the whole term, not the successful stemming of the hemorhage.
As to all the "deception": against a sensationalist press, it would not be responsible to feed the media with facts. I for one would not have the citizenry upset at morning coffee and decide on a Wednesday to pull out no later than Thursday...
We don't get to see the dead and wounded. Having seen the prisoner mistreatment (and some totally over the line torture), who would let those pictures out? We have the numbers: 5000 casualties. Somebody wants to create a picture from that, go ahead, but no cameras, no photojournalist hoping for the Pulizer for turning a victory into defeat.
Post a Comment