All I can say is, "Wow"

[Archaea]

Because you dislike Bush and take pleasure in finding fault with his administration. But you already knew that. In terms of many subjects, you have credibility, but in terms of giving the Bush administration a fair shake, you have no credibility. In this matter, you are partisan to the core. That's okay, but don't be surprised when people call you on it.

And, if one counts, something which appears unverifiable, one can see angle for attack on the Bush administration. This is coming from me, who did not like and does not like the War. I just want our boys to be as protected as we can and for us to stabilize the situation if possible before we leave en masse. But we haven't even left Afghanistan, so who knows.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Because you dislike Bush and take pleasure in finding fault with his administration. But you already knew that. In terms of many subjects, you have credibility, but in terms of giving the Bush administration a fair shake, you have no credibility. In this matter, you are partisan to the core. That's okay, but don't be surprised when people call you on it.

And, if one counts, something which appears unverifiable, one can see angle for attack on the Bush administration. This is coming from me, who did not like and does not like the War. I just want our boys to be as protected as we can and for us to stabilize the situation if possible before we leave en masse. But we haven't even left Afghanistan, so who knows.

You articulate a position without realizing it would presume Bush supporters have no credibility either. And yet, how many times have you questioned the credibility of Bush supporters for defending a Bush policy?

All of this is, however, a diversion, since it is yet another straw man argument. I have not implicated Bush in this discussion. You and others have. You may note that I questioned the reliability of the statistics as well. Somehow, the content of my post gets lost through your prism of interpretation (revealing a strong pro-Bush bias?).

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by hoyacoug

You articulate a position without realizing it would presume Bush supporters have no credibility either. And yet, how many times have you questioned the credibility of Bush supporters for defending a Bush policy?

All of this is, however, a diversion, since it is yet another straw man argument. I have not implicated Bush in this discussion. You and others have. You may note that I questioned the reliability of the statistics as well. Somehow, the content of my post gets lost through your prism of interpretation (revealing a strong pro-Bush bias?).

I am neutral on Bush in that he displeases me often, but the constant attacks from the Left, create a defensive mechanism to defend somebody who can't defend himself here.

Bush is simply better than the alternatives. You ignored what others believe about you, you are strictly anti-Bush, so we will see your comments through that prism. We do not believe you can be fair to him. Perhaps I can never judge Hillary's conduct neutrally. Bill didn't offend me so much, except especially his first two years. And people will judge any assessment of my comments by that.

You are also clever, so something which appears to be neutral could in reality be nothing more than a trap.