The "Comforter in Chief"

[NickD 203]

Still way too much power to be given to only one person, whether good or bad as that person may be. Didn't start that way, but sure ended up like that. Caused by congress shifting the buck to this office. Only power the president should have is over congress, and if a crisis is met, hey, we have ten minutes to vote on this, no BS or speeches, make up your minds, do your research, and vote on it. Period.

[ScratchIt 12]

And you know this because..... Dan Rather told you???

Y'know, when Barrack Obama wasn't being forthcoming about his relationship with Bill Ayers, I was pretty vocal about wanting him to come clean about that relationship. I still feel like he hasn't cleared his relationship up with Ayers 100%, and I think the American people deserve the truth, good or bad.

I think it's also fair to ask Bush to come clean on his time in the National Guard. Regardless of how Rather handled that journalistic disaster, there are a LOT of unanswered questions about Bush's service, and Bush has not been forthcoming about this period of his life. I think the American people deserve to know the truth, good or bad. It's not about politics or partisanship, it's about knowing the truth, even if he's only got days left in office.

Anything Obama does is ok, anything Bush does is bad.

That is as simplistic as believing everything Bush claimed as causes to go to war. So far, Obama hasn't caused any deaths. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for now.

[zqt3344 21]

But what would Hugo Chavez say or do in response to your post? Why he is the greatest leader of all time according to him. You mean you would wish to limit the Great Chavez's power in V town!

Still way too much power to be given to only one person, whether good or bad as that person may be. Didn't start that way, but sure ended up like that. Caused by congress shifting the buck to this office. Only power the president should have is over congress, and if a crisis is met, hey, we have ten minutes to vote on this, no BS or speeches, make up your minds, do your research, and vote on it. Period.

[mox 298]

Anything Obama does is ok, anything Bush does is bad.

I'm not sure if you're trying to say I'm totally in the tank for Obama, but in the first paragraph I gave an example of how Obama is *not* perfect. So I don't follow.

Still way too much power to be given to only one person, whether good or bad as that person may be. Didn't start that way, but sure ended up like that. Caused by congress shifting the buck to this office. Only power the president should have is over congress, and if a crisis is met, hey, we have ten minutes to vote on this, no BS or speeches, make up your minds, do your research, and vote on it. Period.

Mostly agreed. The President is the head of 1/3 of government, and the Commander in Chief. We have been moving dangerously towards making him a Monarch, especially with all the talk of "don't criticize the President in time of war."

[Danno 1,228]

And you know this because..... Dan Rather told you???

Y'know, when Barrack Obama wasn't being forthcoming about his relationship with Bill Ayers, I was pretty vocal about wanting him to come clean about that relationship. I still feel like he hasn't cleared his relationship up with Ayers 100%, and I think the American people deserve the truth, good or bad.

I think it's also fair to ask Bush to come clean on his time in the National Guard. Regardless of how Rather handled that journalistic disaster, there are a LOT of unanswered questions about Bush's service, and Bush has not been forthcoming about this period of his life. I think the American people deserve to know the truth, good or bad. It's not about politics or partisanship, it's about knowing the truth, even if he's only got days left in office.

At this point in our countries history it is rather pointless to explore whether a politician dodged his duty at military service. We know Bill Clinton clearly did and who cared? Bush at least did some guard time but what if he hadn't? We are long past the days when "duty" was an expectation of men.

It was just 2 presidents ago when even admiting he had puffed a joint left Clinton with bad press. Bush had to answer for some old Drunk Driving charge but we hardly even heard about Obamas eager admission (in his books) of using hard drugs regularly.

I think this is both due to the unwillingness of the press to attack Obama and the consistantly lower bar we are setting for our most high office.

Anyway The time to discover these questions is BEFORE a person takes office (gets elected) not after.

It may be possible Bush Got Stateside guard service through a connection, though I doubt it for a number of reasons. (some pretty weak)

1. His father served in the Military with distinction and does not seem like the sort to pull strings

in such a dishonorable way.

2. Bush could have got Easy service IN vietnam ...and this would have been a much greater benefit to him.

3. The press have been climbing all over this story for nearly a decade and have little to show for it.

Crawling through peoples public background

is really the job of a "free Press", .. or should be, ....but now it is the job of "partisan-press".

Perhaps "you" were not "In the tank" for Obama but can anyone claim the Press was not?

This is exactly why we failed to get any investigative stories on Obama.

We knew more about Sarah Palins history after two weeks in the campaign than we ever learned about Obama.

With Obama, even the Wacky Reverend story was an "observatory" effort on the part of the media, certainly not something they were "digging up".

So I guess if Bush took easy Guard service it would be interesting to know but that stone should have been turned over long ago if something was under it.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

frances we dont get to see this combative side to you often. i like it!

that time of the month I'd guess