To: Elroy who wrote (205193 ) 10/5/2004 12:49:45 PM From: i-node Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573682 You evidently think there some actions where US citizens as a group are incapable of understanding the action, but the action is still good for the society so therefore should be undertaken. I can't think of an action that fits that characteristic offhand. I don't lay all the blame on "the people". There is no doubt that Bush is a highly inept communicator. I knew that going in, but I deeply believed in his ability and integrity of purpose. If I could change something about Bush, it wouldn't be his policy -- it would be his inability to articulate why his policy is the right one. He has failed miserably in this respect. I believe I fully understand why Iraq had to be done and, in spite of the media coverage and the position of the Left, I believe we are safer today and will become much safer as time goes on. The BS that John Fowler spouts that, "after all, we only lost 3,000" is utter idiocy, unriveled by anything I've seen posted on this board in the years I've been here. All that said, I don't believe government should always be totally honest with its "countrymen". I simply don't believe that. Churchill didn't believe it, either. There are some things about war that are simply too sensitive to turn loose on the public. That's why we hire a president. To make tough decisions when it isn't practical for the "countrymen" to have all the facts. You put your trust in a man, he may blow it, but you can't just shift gears halfway through -- which is the mistake I fear we'll make. The politicization of Vietnam this year is a black mark on our political process that must not be allowed to occur again. And just this week, a Kerry ad called Bush a liar. This is out and out indecent in my view. The immoral and indecent actions of the Kerry campaign ought to give people pause. But these are the same people who enjoy the Springer show, so it probably won't matter.