little slow on the draw, Georgey
 

So why are the GOP talking heads all acting like it's something new that people think W "deliberately mislead" Congress and the American people regarding the WMD situation in Iraq?

I remember pretty damn clearly when this war was still building up that the many were saying extant evidence for Iraq having WMDs was contested and shaky. But it was a heck of a lot easier than selling the war on the grounds that it was a good time for the US to attempt to remake the Middle East in its own image.

I don't really blame him for taking that route. And accusing a politician of "deliberately misleading" anyone is really only saying they were talking again.

The GOP needs to get their collective panties out of a wad and just tell the Dems and the American people that it's a little late in the course to just give up on Iraq and go home. It's like Rove always said - if you're explaining, you're losing.

Re: little slow on the draw, Georgey
 

Poll numbers.


Well, simply because they're addressing it doesn't mean that they're conceding it.

I think, even with his low ratings and Iraq looking pretty crappy, most people haven't come to the conclusion that Bush just flat out lied. I think people are unhappy about alot of things, and the handling of Iraq is one of them, but I'd be willing to bet that even those people who answer no to "Is the president trustworthy?" don't think he directly lied to them.

I think the Republicans will stick to their message, and that message will basically be "Democrats have no plans or ideas, so they slander and attack, blah blah."


It's always better to be on the offensive in politics. With that being said, you can come up with a better defense than this. What you just described is essentially "stay the course." People are getting pretty tired of that.

To add to my point:

http://usatoday.com/news/washington/...strategy_x.htm

It is bizarre, though, for them to act as if the Missleading theory is brand new. There was plenty of press about stovepipping and Rummy having a private intelligence unit withing the Pentagon and State being cut out of the loop while it was happening.

I think it's the easiest thing for them to defend against.

Think about it-- If poll numbers are down on your handling of iraq, and you want to get back on the offensive to try to turn it around, do you attack the practical criticism (i.e. Russ Feingold, Chcuk Hagel, and even John mcCain) being thrown at you, or do you pick away at the weakest argument, the one that the American people would probably have the hardest time buying?