New Book Illuminates Top Levels of Government Heading Into Iraq

Jessica_Alba

Real good theme. Thanks, webmaster(s) ;)

Stopping WMDs

Bush and the GOP were responisble for the elimination of Libya's nuclear weapons program, the shutting down of Pakistan's mad nuke scientist and his efforts to help evil regimes acquire nukes, and the stopping of Saddam's plans to re-start his nuke program.

As a result of US efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, millions of Muslims (all over the globe) have turned against the terror tactics of al Qaeda. The democratically elected govt of Iraq gets stronger every day. History will show that Bush and the GOP got it done despite the desperate efforts of the Dems and the MSM to defeat the United States.

One Man's Trash is Another Man's Treasure

Northern Pike, I prefer:-

'Seventh bullet point

The most important bullet point of all.

*It was President Bush, the Republicans and the conservative half of the Democratic Party that are responsible for this $3 trillion successful campaign against the world's bad guys.'

Seventh bullet point

The most important bullet point of all.

*It was President Bush, the Republicans and the conservative half of the Democratic Party that are responsible for this $3 trillion disaster.

Saddam and al Qaeda intel battle

Nice post Michael. If you read George Tenet's book about the background disputes on the Saddam al Qaeda question you still get this inconsistent dismissal of what was good and bad intel on the issue. I tend to agree with Feith that the CIA was putting way to much stock in the secular vs. Islamist thing and were throwing out intelligence that disagreed with this faulty premise.

I have a few future interviews on this topic scheduled at my site, www.regimeofterror.com, from some others who were behind the scenes on this and I think the public really deserves to hear both sides, not just the pro CIA, anti Bush side we are deluged with any time the topic comes up in the "mainstream" press.

Obama's Comments on Trade

Obama makes it clear that one of the irrational prejudices of small town America is one against free trade. Yet he has pandered to this bias in order to cultivate votes in his own campaigning. This would seem to be a paramount example of telling the "fools" what they want to hear in order to keep them placated. It is cynical and dishonest and yet it is evidently admitted to by Obama, himself, by joining his own remarks made in different speeches together.

It certainly makes the earlier reassurance by an Obama economic advisor to the Canadian government that his position against NAFTA was not real but simply for political impression more believable. Obama's rock-bottom beliefs on free trade may be rational, but it is his dishonesty and contempt for "small-town" America that is troubling.