[PornoDoggy]

Now wait a minute. I thought you were comparing Bush to Franklin Roosevelt - or is that like, so yesterday?

First of all, I think - unfortunately - that you may be right about Bush being re-elected, but I wouldn't call it a sure thing yet. I only hope he shows the same arrogance on that assumption that you do.

Second, your comparisson to the late 1890s and early 1900s is appropriate only if you acknowledge there are certain imperialist aims inherent in the Bush foreign policy. Since that would put you in complete agreement with the most radical of the Bush opponents on the left, I find that odd - although one never knows when the wackos on the extremes will meet.

Third, I haven't seen much in the way of "beef" when it comes to tackling terrorism. I am an Unbeliever in your "leader' - a cynic who believes that the job was poorly done in Afghanistan, quite possibly going very wrong in Iraq already, and, to repeat myself, the very connection between the terrorists who threaten the United States and Iraq is a product of the same spin-doctors who talked of our "knowledge" of WMD in the hands of field commanders.

Fourth, I think that GW is doing as much to destabalize the Middle East as he is to stabalize it. I realize that I - like the American people - am not privy to the Grand Plan; however, I doubt that you are either.

Finally, I doubt George W. Bush will do much more of a military nature in Korea than his predecssor did - at least, not without far more provacation than we've seen so far. There are far more factors at play on the Korean peninsula and in Asia than come to play in Iraq. Perhaps it's that your Bush cheerleader outfit deprives you of some blood to the brain, but the answer to every problem is not military.

Oh, and btw ... I do understand your "Jesse Jackson" comparison now. However, I was wrong in calling you Ari Fleischer.

You really sound more like Dig talking about Bill Clinton.



Last edited by PornoDoggy at Jun 16 2003, 10:28 PM