Robert I agree with you. A president cannot fight a war based on public opinion. The public doesn't get to see the intelligence reports that the president sees nor should we. We are probably only exposed to 10% (my opinion) of the available information that he uses to make his decisions. Also public opinion is tainted by emotions. Many people tend to be against the war because they have kids over there and they fear for their safety. I can definitely relate to that. I have kids. Neither of them in the military but if they were I can't say it wouldn't affect my judgment. Fortunately for this country, Bush has never let the polls cloud his decision making. He has always governed according to his convictions.

Something else along these lines that should not be tolerated, the unofficial release of classified or potentially harmful information to the US through the media. I don't know how anyone doing this can be considered doing something good for the country. Is it because " someone has to tell the truth"?? And I for one am glad that our president does not follow polls to base policy on. He was elected because he explained his position on topics and people who agreed with that voted for him. And he continues to follow those beliefs, not flipping back and forth based on public opinion polls. You're right Blaze, the public does not know all the facts in intel briefs. Which is a good thing, look at those loose lips flapping in the news every day!!   

You're right guys. It doesn't matter that most Americans think the president is completely nuts...Public opinion only counts when it conveniently lines up with your own beliefs.  Let the FOX network and the late night TV crowd lambaste him...He can just laugh it all off - heh heh heh - because his family's connections to the oil industry will surely outlast the "civil war"  he continues to deny our American sons and daughters are dying for in Iraq.  That same courageous leader who won't allow the press to cover the carnage and the coffins that are coming home from Iraq - more than 3000 of them to date.

Did it ever occur to you that your so-called courageous  leader admitted that he twisted public opinion to get us into the war in the first place?

Comparing Bush to JFK is like comparing Mother Teresa to a retired porn star. They're both women who spent their lives talking to God and helping others.

Bush has become a laughing stock in US

By Jill Singer

January 15, 2007 12:00am
Article from: Herald-Sun


SUCH is Australia's enthusiasm for colonial subservience, there's an old joke that Britain will become a republic before we do.

A newer version is that the US will pull out of Iraq before we do.

Prime Minister John Howard is about the last man standing who still insists that US President George W. Bush got it right on Iraq. Even Bush admits he was wrong.

Let's get it straight. Operation Iraqi Freedom is officially a failure.

The awful truth is that the majority of Iraqis were better off under Saddam Hussein than the US-delivered regime of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Maliki is just another supporter of sectarian violence.

In his case, it is Shiite Muslims rather than Saddam's bunch of Sunnis. He's done little if anything to control the fanatical Shiite militia led by Moqtada al-Sadr, a fiercely anti-American brute of a man.

At his hanging, even Saddam expressed a detached and ironic amusement upon learning that shrieking Moqtada supporters had been invited along as witnesses to his execution.

I'm writing this from the US where there is blanket media coverage of The President's Plan: Bush's revised strategy for saving face on Iraq.

Essentially, it's just to send more troops. It's a strategy that is impressing few, apart from the most trenchant of conservatives.

In my view, the biggest mistake Bush made was not that he didn't send in enough troops, but that he started an unwinnable war in the first place.

There are about 130,000 there now and Bush plans to send an extra 17,500 troops to Baghad and 4000 to fight al-Qaida in Anbar province.

Bush's supporters aren't even praying for victory across Iraq any more, just praying to get out, with Baghdad somehow "contained" and a media strategy to contain the fallout.

The architects of the war are lining up to distance themselves from it.

This month's Vanity Fair contains a stunning piece of reporting from David Rose, a former supporter of the invasion of Iraq.

Rose interviewed dozens of neo-conservatives behind the disastrous decision.

Almost as one, they point the finger of blame at others rather than accept responsibility for the disaster.

Most notable is Richard Perle, former chairman of the Pentagon's defence policy.

Perle had predicted that Iraq was a very good candidate for democracy in the Middle East and that Iranians would be so impressed by the success of Iraq, post-Saddam, that they would follow suit and bring in regime change.

Like the K-Tel ad-man, Perle said there would be more: Syria would agree to stop backing terrorists.

Now, he says he underestimated the depravity that pervades Iraq.

Now, he smells failure and fears the consequences. In his words, we are possibly about to witness all the mayhem the world is capable of creating.

Thanks for that, Dick.

Then there's David Frum, who co-wrote Bush's infamous axis of evil speech. He now says defeat may be inescapable and to attempt to justify taking any risks at all on behalf of the coalition of the willing would be difficult.

All this as Bush demands that more and more of his fellow citizens take the greatest risk of all on behalf of his failed strategy.

The nightly TV news in the US is heartbreaking, as devastated families line up to mourn the loss of their loved ones.

And, of course, the grief doesn't end there, with many thousands more returned soldiers trying to survive with horrific injuries.

Some have trouble telling their stories: it's kind of hard to speak when your lips have been burned off.

Apart from the human cost of this war, the financial cost has been catastrophic.

So far the US has poured more than $US350 billion into it and has earmarked at least another billion.

The only upside, if you're an American, is if you happen to be, say, Vice-President Dick Cheney, whose business mates are making a financial killing from the war.

In the immediate future, we might expect to hear Bush come out with escalating rhetoric about how the Iraqis "ain't doin' good 'nuff runnin' their country".

Damned fools those Iraqis, perhaps they just need another good dose of regime change.

Bush's new plan for Iraq has cemented his reputation as a lame duck president who is rapidly becoming the most loathed in US history.

Poll after poll confirms his plummeting popularity as at least two out of three Americans reckon the invasion of Iraq was a devastating mistake.

The man has become a despised laughing stock.

In the blanket coverage leading up to the release of The President's Plan, David Letterman was wise-cracking relentlessly along the lines of Plan A: dig Saddam up and execute him again.

A segment of great presidentiall speeches was broadcast. John F. Kennedy's "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" was followed by Bush lecturing Americans about the invasion of Iran, whoops, Iraq.

Australians need to question why we're still tagging along with Bush. It was a mistake to join the war. It's time to call it quits.

I don't need to say anything about the Iraq War other than it was poorly planned,truthfully we should have never gone there in the first place.  STUPID STUPID STUPID

My concern is our National Debt:

It took 225 years to accumulate the first 70% of our national debt. The last 30% has been incurred in the past 4 1/2 years and the party in power calls itself conservative???

If we don't start paying this down then some day we may reach a "tipping point". This is no joke - China may decide to stop re-investing in the US and cash-in their I.O.U.s ... then where will we be? If the Federal Government can't make its payments then it's going to increase taxes dramatically. This kind of debt combined with a falling US economy could lead to National disaster unseen since the Civil War.

I hate to say it but we need Bill clinton back in office.

I think it is high time that Bush makes the war in Iraq more personal for himself and his family. Send the Blondie Twins over there to fight for their father's "convictions" with everyone else's kids. Send the Bush nieces and nephews, too. Maybe if it hit home a bit more, Dubya would think twice about sending other young Americans over to fight an impossible war. He is too busy trying to save his ego and his reputation to make any attempt to listen to the input of others. And let's not forget, it is not only public opinion that is against Bush's "new strategy" (translation: stay the course, again) but also many of those in power who are privy to the information that is kept from the general public.  He even has turned against him many of those who once supported him.
Bush. Like a Rock...Only Dumber.

RobertCarter, I still believe that in some respects JFK was masterful. Without question his decisions throughout the Cuban Missile Crisis kept us from nuclear war. So, in one respect, but for him, perhaps none of us would be here to write in these blogs. As you may recall, that was the only time in modern history when the country's military was at DEFCON 2, with DEFCON 1 being, essentially, nuclear war. Many people have varying opinions of JFK's lifestyle and other decisions, but I am really glad he was President during that particular time period. I have switched parties many, many times in my life. I have always wanted to stay fairly moderate in that an extreme view may preclude listening. I just wanted to respond regarding your writing about JFK.