Acidus wrote:
] ] And what I really hate, is the idea that a 9/11
] investigation
] ] is being used like this during an election year. I agree
] that
] ] it's worthwhile to find out the truth, but I see many other
] ] motivations here than truth-finding.
]
] Both sides are making this political. Clarke to sell books,
] but Bush to pospone the release of important information
] regarding how well he and his administration handled one of
] the worst events in American History. Which is do you care
] about more?
]
] ] this investigation. I also really despise any insinuation
] ] that the White House knew about the impending attack but did
]
] ] nothing to stop it. That's just absurd.
]
] I agree as well.
]
] My complain is Bush's decisions are based seemly *entirely* on
] public opinion. He didn't think Rice testifing was important
] until after the media reamed him for a week. Bush kept moving
] the Exit date from Iraq earlier and earlier the more soldiers
] died. A man who makes policy based on opinion polls is not
] a man to be President. That statement applies to all
] candidate or officals.

Also, another important part of this is that he chose not to act . He chose not to act when there was a REAL threat, and acted on another that was founded in BULLSHIT. Maybe if he listened to the INTELLIGENCE instead of the cliffs notes versions, he wouldn't come across as being such a dumb fuck.

RE: Bush Agrees to Let Rice Testify Publicly