Yes, I have worked for politcal campaigns as a volunteer and several of my friends work in politics.

As I have said before, for the most part politics is a big game. There is not that big a difference between the two parties. Most of the people in the Senate are multi-millionaires that have much more in common with each other than they have with you or me. Their votes are pretty much for sale to the highest bidder.

The truth of the matter is that many of these senators in both parties are total hypocrites. Let's take Nancy Peolsi for example. She claims to be a real liberal that supports unions. But in real life, she owns a $25 million vineyard that is a non-union shop. She also owns a large stake in a ritzy hotel that has 250 employees, but once again it is strictly a non-union shop. This type of thing is typical with politicians in both parties.

You hardly backed it up. Saying that it was one of the best in history is quite a statement. Its not even close and nothing you have said has backed that up.

None of them had much experience in dealing POLITICALLY with the rest of the world. Thats the point.

Look at Reagans cabinet. Baker, Weinberger and schultz. This one isnt even close.

And still no answer. Surely you can find some blog on this cant you?

There could be a small effect but I don't think it would be that big of a deal. Here is one opinion:

http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdo...5b0b055c789422

I would say the same thing about Rober Gates as the other guys. I don't know if Gates will do a good job or not but he is widely respected and he is considered to be an excellent choice.

If the Holocost never happened I would like him ( David Duke) to explain who put those numbered tattoos with paper documentation on those survivors arms. There is more proof of mass killings and the attempt to wipe out a race of people than there is of it never happening. To be honest and this may sound absurd but Germany should give its statehood to the Jewish people , it is they who uprooted these people from their homes all over Europe and slaughtered them . Europe should be held culpable along with U.S. for allowing this to happen they knew all along what was going on and yet they turned a blind eye to help these people. Most Jews that were killed by the S.S. and Hitlers puppets were European Jews , people who were part of the economic , scientific and cultural world , people who contributed to their communities and country.

Here is the kind of stuff that the mainstrem media was saying about the Bush foreing policy team when they first came into office. This article is from 2001:

The Bush Team Shares a Vision But Not How To Reach It
The Washington Post
September 30, 2001
By James Mann

"Suddenly, the Bush administration’s foreign policy team occupies center stage in Washington. After eight months of focus on domestic issues such as the tax cut, the nation will now be watching anxiously to see if the administration can deal with the rest of the world in a way that will prevent further attacks on American soil. Luckily, Bush’s foreign policy advisers have a remarkable record of experience to draw upon. They’re going to need it."

This is the type of thing that everyone was saying when they first came into office. That was my point. Even all my democratic friends thought Bush had a great foreign policy team.

I was just doing a search on the internet and I was surprised when I clicked on a google link and it lead to an article on commondreams.com. This article is actually relevant to some of the stuff that we have been discussing in this thread. The article was written just before the 2004 election. I bet you guys never thought I would post a link to an article on commondreams.


http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0218-13.htm

I know that this is going to sound like redboarding, but i had my doubts from the start.

The experience they had was in war and not in diplomacy and never did any of them have anything to do with a rebuilding situation (although its been a long time since we have had to rebuild). How was Colin Powell qualified? He wasnt and it showed.

The foreign policy team was heavy in an agenda toward war and that is what we got.

You may have been right. I'm not saying that they were a great team. I'm saying that they looked like a great team to most people(myself included).

It's kind of similar to Robert Gates. Everyone is saying what a great choice he is and how qualified he is. For the most part, everyone is raving about him. He may or may not do a good job, but he certainly is not a controversial choice.

Rup-

Did you read the article???????

Great link by the way. Thanks.

29% hike in user costs and the study is being conservative (no pun intended)

Flat tax would have a much more dramatic effect in the short run than is being represented in this study especially considering the current climate of the housing market.

I really dont have an issue with Gates. He is doing mop up duty right now anyway and he cant really do anything "wrong". If he screws up, he can blame it on the mess he inherited. If he does anything marginally good, he is a hero.

The most qualified member of the original team was Richard Clarke and he was ignored and then demoted.

lot of talk on this thread.

much easier to just remember that President Bush and the ppl he appoints are always right.
hes the most powerful man in the history of time.
get on board or shut the hell up.



Repent

That article is about a specific flat-tax that was proposed. I don't know the specific details of that proposal. Even if I did, I'm not an economist. That specific proposal may have had specific new rules for real estate investments.

All I'm saying is that I'd like to see some type of combination of a national sales tax and something close to a flat-tax. I don't know what any of the serious details would be. I just think that the current system is terrible and some type of flat-tax and national sales tax would probably make more sense than the current system.

We must not be talking about the same Richard Clarke.

http://www.brookesnews.com/042903ecclewilkinson.html

Again, Rup, how is that link any more viable than commondreams?

It's not all that much different than commondreams but I think that many of their criticisms of Clarke are legitimate. They guy did lie. He totally changed his story. He totally changed his story and he was trying to sell a book. That certainly hurts his credibility.

By the way, with commondreams.com I've never said that everything they say is a flat out lie. Sure there are some lies but most of the things they say are half-truths and one-sided arguments. When you only hear half-truths and one-sided arguments, you are only getting half the story.

So with Richard Clarke, I'm not saying that the story I linked is the only truth or the whole story, but it is a point of view that some people have of Clarke. My point was that you may think Clarke is great but there are plenty of other people that think Clarke is a liar who has no credibilty at all. There are two sides to most things.

I am going back to the original topic.
I think the debate on Iran and what do with the man in charge is... let him hang himself. Now can we somehow accelerate the process without getting involved directly...?
This Middle East thing has taken a very interesting turn. Iraq, Sunni v. Shiite, has changed the dynamics. We now have a number of Arab nations scared to death that the Persian Shiites will gain too much of a foothold. And the split is even showing up in Gaza... foreign affairs is a very complex business. We may have inadvertantly started bringing the Islamic house down on itself. The rifts are growing in other countries. Arab countries taking sides... very interesting.

The credibility of clarke comes from having served under Reagan, HW Bush and Clinton. Those guys seemed to think he had credibility. For some reason, it didnt pan out with this guy when it worked with those guys. I wonder why.