Just because he testifies under oath doesn't mean he is telling the truth.  Welcome to the real world to think politicians tell the truth all the time..he has no credibility so why even bother with him. Even our own state senator Rockefeller said in his report based on the evidence we were right going to war and he is a democrat.  It is a matter of public record that Putin told Sadaam we were going to invade and the WMD were all moved to Syria right before we got there..

it's like you want to believe this is the truth. maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but just because one man got up and testified, doesn't make it the gospel truth. how many people have testified and their words have been lies?

they weren't thinking. it's incredibly difficult to think clearly when your head is so deeply implanted in your ass. lincoln, reagan, it's just a shame that in the past 8 years no one has tried to remove bush from office.    

If Scott McClellan thinks he's doing this country a favor by writing a book and testifying before congress, he's about 4+ years too late.  If he knew about what was going wrong and didn't quit on the spot or step forward and put this out in the open, then why say anything at all?   He was complicit in it..

Oh thats, write, he wrote a BOOK after the country got 4 more years of that administration.

   

lol. wait till mccain gets in. it was "sounding" like obama was going to blow mccain away - but with the polls and whatnot, i'm wondering where all the hardcore demo's are?

this election is going to suck even worse than the past two.

and yeah, now that i think about it...where the heck was this guy 4+ years ago? there are no excuses for that. period. there's something strange going on there.

I don't know what polls you are looking at shotshot... but today's Newsweek poll has Obama +15 NATIONALLY over McSame.

All of the other polls, and I mean ALL of them... have Obama beating McSame today.

THAT'S where the hardcore dems are today. Myself included.

From Newsweek:

Barack finally has his bounce. For weeks many political experts and pollsters have been wondering why the race between Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain had stayed so tight, even after the Illinois senator wrested the nomination from Hillary Clinton. With numbers consistently showing rock-bottom approval ratings for President Bush and a large majority of Americans unhappy with the country's direction, the opposing-party candidate should, in the normal course, have attracted more disaffected voters. Now it looks as if Obama is doing just that.

Obama's current lead also reflects the large party-identification advantage the Democrats now enjoy—55 percent of all voters call themselves Democrats or say they lean toward the party while just 36 percent call themselves Republicans or lean that way.

lol, well...i was obviously looking at the polls that the newsweek article was referencing. they obviously aren't the same now - but they were close. you didn't know that? or you did and you just wanted to be really sweet and get your "condescend" on?

i like how you did that though...maybe i'll try that next time. i'll like, poke fun at someone as if i just can't figure out what they're talking about, and then follow that up with an article or citation that references exactly what they're talking about. if reading that didn't seem to make sense, then i did good. lol.

also, completely unrelated and equally sarcasm-less...are you a second-gen frank? like, was that you father's name too?

He wrote the book because of the Plame investigation. There is a civil suit going on right now and he didn't feel that the Plames were dealt with fairly.

Also, saying something publicly isn't the same as testifying in Congress under oath. His testimony backs up Richard Clark's testimony on the hill. So it is really damning evidence.

Just curious as to why y'all are continuing to back Bush. Is it that you are stubborn? This is really bad - really bad. Is it that you don't read what's going on or is it just that you are set that he's a great president and that's that?

I honestly am so puzzled as to why you nice folks defend the worst president in history?

Newsweek is a very left editorial packaged as an unbiased magazine.  Of course they are going to have Obama in front of McCain.  (I'm not saying that McCain is winning.)  Newsweek, Time, and other media outlets that bow to the left are going to tell the things they want people to hear it in order to get their agenda out.  Being "Hardcore" either way, to the left or the right, is not always the best solution.  People need to be able to think for themselves and not just do what other charasmatic people tell them they should do.  The problem with the way people vote today is that young people vote the way George Clooney tells them to vote and others vote party lines instead of voting for the people that seem to really want to make a difference.

As far as the number of people calling themselves Dems being 55% vs. only 36% calling themselves Republicans, this is the type of information Newsweek wants to be out because it furthers their agenda in pushing Obama towards the White House.

Also, things like the economy aren't affected overnight.  Many good things that happend during the Clinton years were a result of Reaganomics and many things now are a result of the Clinton administration.  I'm not saying that Bush has been a good President, but he is just one man and many others had to give approval for his intentions.

War is always going to divide people and their opinions.  I think Iraq has been a major mistake also and I wish there was something that could be done to scale back our efforts in the middle east without giving terrorist room to make future moves against us.  War sucks anytime, for any reason, but sometimes it is unavoidable (I agree that Iraq could have been avoide, maybe, but not now that we are involved).  I have a cousin that has had a couple of tours through the middle east between Iraq and Afganahstan, so I have family involvement, but human loss is apart of it and there is nothing that can be done about that.  Imagine if we had to fight WWII now, we would all be speaking German.

not defending bush at all. i'm sure he, like the rest of us, is not without fault.

i just don't believe everything that i read. for the most part, the press is liberal and does not shine favorably on conservatives.

in addition, scandal sells, where good does not.

i think it is amazing how even one person is apologetic or sympathetic towards this administration. Leading a country into war for personal agendas is the act of a dictator, not a democratic leader. The only way to get a democratic country to attack another country pre-emptively would be for it to be a mandate - and the country - IF IT KNEW THE TRUTH - would not have gone to war. It did because it was lied to.

Sometimes you nice folks are so frustrating.

Once again, you believe everything you read in the liberal news media who is undeniably biased?  How many news anchors have left the medium who have stated they got tired of giving the news the way the network wants you to believe.  They got tired of it and left.  Need I say more? How many liberals ignore the facts that is out there only to be blinded by their own biases....

Funny... Newsweek didn't poll Gore or Kerry 15 points over Bush when HE was leading.

I love how people only distrust the "media" when it doesn't tell them what they want to hear.

"How many liberals ignore the facts that is out there only to be blinded by their own biases...."

Gosh I don't know... I bet about the same number of conservatives that are also biased?

:P

I'm right there with you Gary...

And no, I am not a 2nd Gen Frank. My maternal grandfather was a Frank though.

Here are some more recent polls:

Rasmussen 6/21 (a right leaning pollster)

Obama: 48%
McCain: 43%

USA Today/Gallup Snapshot Poll

Obama: 50% (47%) [47%]
McCain: 44% (44%) [48%]

Fox News (your favorite conservative news outlet)

Their last polling was End of April and showed a rare modest McCain Lead of +3. Now the 7% Swing is significant.

Obama: 45% (43%)
McCain: 41% (46%)

Gallup Tracking:

Obama: 46%
McCain: 44%

---------------

Bottom line... We're ahead today. In particular, Obama is beating McSame by BIG margins amoung Independent voters. IF these trends continue, its going to be a landslide.

QBGuru: I am the "right" and I am not blaming anyone. Please don't include every person in a group in your comments. Many people are blaming President Bush for all of our woes, you included.

I don't believe that any one man is to blame for all of the issues we face in today's society.

I think anyone would have been challenged by 911. It was dumped in Bush's lap.

Granted, things are not the best right now.

We live in a world filled with sin.

There are people suffering everywhere.

No one person is going to make it all better.

Not a Democrat, not a Republican, no one.

Each of us can only do the best we can do.

fjblau: none of the poll numbers are blowouts by any means and we have a ways to go.

Even if your Democratic candidate becomes elected, he will not be the savior and it will not be the victory you may think it will be.

No one person can fix the woes of the world.

Au Contraire... if a democrat wins it will be EXACTLY the victory I think it will be.... ie: a progressive administration in the White House... and more Democrats in the congress... for things like appointing Supreme Court justices.... but thanks for playing the "tell a liberal what they think" game and failing.

You are right, no one person can fix the woes of the world. That is why we live by democratic principles and have social contracts. That is why I want to see a LOT more democrats elected in the next election.

I'm reading a VERY interesting book entitled "Reclaiming Conservatism" by Micky Edwards. Edwards was a Rep. Senator (or Congressmean, can't remember) for a number of years, worked on Goldwater's campaign, and the Reagan administration.

I should preface to say, that as a 26 year old owner of a design firm, (making me pretty republican), and a very socially minded Christian (making me very liberal), I have no label for myself. So I'm searching for one. Just so it's easier for my ad to pigeon-hole me ;)

In his book, Edwards proposes that those who call themselves conservatives today, have no clue really what true conservatism is. This is largely do to the influence of the religious right. True conservatism relied on a deep belief that the thing to 'conserve' was the constitution. This meant a highly limited, small, and agile government, that stayed out of people's personal lives (i.e. issues like Gay Marriage). Only recently have conservatives tried to use Government to restrict the freedom of citizens. Goldwater's maxim was "Does it maximize freedom?".

Anyway, one of Edwards fears was this unabashed apologist mindset from conservatives; a movement originally born out of fear and a healthy skepticism of government. He claims he has not seen more of this than with the Bush Administration and a republican controlled house that provided a de facto breakdown of Constitutional checks and balances by being Yes Men to the Executive Branch, a dangerous situation regardless of who is in power. He (and I, especially in the comments section of Gary's Blog) also see it in conservative everymen. The day to days that seem to put their whole heart and trust into a president. From a Christian standpoint, it's almost heretical. From a political standpoint, it's scary as hell.

I consider myself a Moderate. Left and Righ wingers can't stand this. I tell people I'm open-minded. They think this means I haven't yet (or don't "have the balls" to) make a decision on things. They also think it means I'm open to any and every idea, just stick in my brain for me. Neither could be further from the truth. Being open minded doesn't mean my mind is ready to be raped by whomever get's the first. It means that if an idea or thought makes it's way in there, I will wrestle that sucker to the ground, investigate it, read it, beat the crap out of it, dust it off, and if I think it fits, it stays. I think 'closed minded' people are the opposite. Their world is small and easy - and their brain it much easier to manipulate and invade - it just has to come from the right person. My dad will believe ANYTHING Sean Hannity says. Yet he considers himself 'closed minded'. This just means little to no investigative thought.

I value truth no matter who's side it's on. This means I find myself constantly defending something I have no business defending, Muslims, Obama, etc. I had a small war with a local christian paper after they published lies regarding the Muslim faith. I don't know much about the Muslim faith, but there I was, a Christian, who went to Bible school, defending the Muslim faith - defending Truth, no matter where it is.

So I have to call people out when I see 'easy' arguments, i.e. :

"How many news anchors have left the medium who have stated they got tired of giving the news the way the network wants you to believe. "

I dunno Lightinspire. You tell us. You didn't make a point or provide facts. You just asked a question like it was a fact? Poor poor rhetoric.

It's also too damn easy to discount every single bit of information from " The liberal media". Use your damn Brains. Honest to God I don't get people who use this excuse. It's so easy. Shear laziness.
Wow this is long. sorry. Just some thoughts I've had lately. www.rabidmoderate.com

Great points Jarrett.

I would add to them that as we get older, we do recognize that there are things we have LEARNED. For example... I have learned that Evolution is settled science, and there are no good scientific arguments that refute it. Is this closed minded of me? Perhaps... but I am also not going to walk around saying that there are NO good arguments for Evolution or that it hasn't been tested and demonstrated thousands of times.

The same thing goes for a lot of my political beliefs. I have learned that the policies, processes and ideas that are behind liberalism and by extension, the Democratic party, are a much better reflection of how I view the world and how it is best managed. Sure, I can imagine that there might be someone that calls themselves a Republican that espouses those ideas in a way that I could agree with. I've just never seen one that does, yet. Is that closed minded? Or is it just recognizing that I have beliefs that are by and large consistently represented by one of the major political parties in this country. To be sure, its not 100% consistent... witness the FISA vote yesterday... but I still believe that the platforms and ideas of the Democratic party is a much better representation of my personal beliefs.

I also believe that we have to be a PART of the political process. Just opting out because you can't find someone that shares ALL of your beliefs is cowardly. That is why I am VERY active politically... at the local (non-partisan)and at the larger (partisan) levels. The ONLY way the system works is if we are a part of the process.

But I also laugh at the blaming of the "liberal media".... that Rupert Murdoch.... what a lefty.

and ps robinone... I don't elect presidents to be "saviors". I elect them to lead the country.

Jarrett-

WOW. GREAT POST!!! You rock!!!!