I would describe my political leanings as center right in fact. My argument with Bush has always been the same, that what they do is not based on a right wing policy very often. It's usually a mix of corruption and selling out to special interests which is not part of Republicanism any more than it is part of being a Democrat.

In fact I don't believe I have ever proposed government spending except to point out universal health care is cheaper as a percentage of GNP. Most right wing parties around the world would never dismantle it anyway, it saves too much money.

Republicanism is a fusion of two principles, libertarianism and conservatism. There's nothing in either of those about corruption. If some people take my comments to be pro left and decide to bind even more tightly to Bush, frankly I don't care. If I see a crook I'll write about it.

My point is simple, that corruption in politics never leads to anything good. The story about Bush and the National Guard may annoy some people on the right and make them even more determined not to vote for a Democrat. That's not my problem. My point is the president lied in his memoirs and after about what he did.

In some ways that might be as innocuous as lying about sex. The difference is there are suggestions of altering records and being awol which in many cases would be felonies. A substantial accusation of a sitting president committing felonies deserves to be thoroughly aired.

They did the same with Clinton and it turned out to be false, but a special prosecutor should really be looking at this.

Corruption is not part of the Republican platform. At the moment you have DeLay accused of corrupt offering of influence, several members of Cheney's staff possibly being indicted for 10 year jail terms over Plame, Cheney possibly to be indicting over bribes in Niger, Bush's blatant inside trading in Harken, and so on.

These things are just corruption and people on the right should be even more incensed than the left. After all it is their party that is being destroyed by this. People who think this is acceptable might need a refresher course in what Republicanism is supposed to stand for. If people think this is acceptable then you become part of the problem that is destroying the political party. There are plenty of Republican politicians that agree with everything I say but they have been sidelined by the sheer magnitude of the corruption or bought off.

Also economically Bush's policies have virtually nothing to do with Republicanism, as most right wing blogs now point out. Also most economists blame Bush for damaging the economy with these policies. Republicanism is about controlling spending and the deficit, and Bush is just not representing Republicanism.

What he is doing is promoting corporate socialism, creating a welfare state for corporations.

There is so much corruption it now lays claim to being a politicial philosophy which it is not. Why does anyone think the Carlysle Group was formed. Why would you get retired politicians and public servants, pay them lots of money and set them dealing with people still working for the government? The whole idea from the start can be only to use their inside knowledge and also influence those still working to throw deals to Carlysle and get a cushy job later.

This is what Poppy Bush is doing, and did with the Crusader. Richard Perle has so many conflicts of interest it's too much to even list. Is Rumsfeld going to go back to Bechtel after making them so much money? Is Cheny going back to Halliburton?

THis is nothing to do with free enterprise or capitalism, it's just corrupt people making an easy buck sucking on the public teat.