Bias is Bias Adam. No real skeptical independent could miss this. Sure we should suspect Bush Sr's current comments might be influenced by his son being office. That doesn't mean you don't give him a chance to speak. Objective reporting requires a fair hearing. Skeptical independent minds then weigh whether the comments or objective thinking. Journalism in this country has become a joke. Everyone is promoting an agenda rather than trying to find truth. The lack ability of the Democrats to face this issue gives them far less credibility in my eyes than a supposedly less than brilliant president believing the same intelligence data his supposedly brilliant predecessor also believed.

Your Direct link comment is pure Democratic BS. As much BS as Bush's tax cut rationale's. No one is claiming one and no one in the Bush admin ever claimed it was more than a possibility. A foreign source not a US one made that claim. Our strategy changes precisely because this enemy is like no other we faced. To think we should use the same strategy for a new kind of enemy is imbecilic.

I don't know whether we are safer or not now. I do know that under Clinton Iraq sanctions weakened with the help of France and Russia and that Al-quida grew stronger. There is no way I'm supporting a return to Clinton's policies, and Kerry lost almost any chance of getting my vote by promoting Clinton and Carter foreign policy views. History will have to decide if Bush's course is correct or there is a better third, fourth etc way out of this.

As for being a target, we were the #1 target already. It's silly to think anything has changed. To stop being a target would require caving to terrorists demands. While Democrats won't admit it that, some of their comments seem to be leaning that way to me. They'd rather pull out of Iraq prematurely and let it fail miserably so that they can point to a Bush failure rather than make sure we achieve some lasting good there.

Regards,
Mark