This is the best one yet. This is absolutely true, you can look it up on MSNBC.com.

Today, Bush made this comment regarding Kerry:

“A political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief,” What? Are you freaking serious? So, for example, someone who starts in war in Iraq before knowing all the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief? I mean, is this not a microcosm of the War in Iraq? And perhaps a better question, why isn't Kerry jumping all over this?

Gee, Aldeth. I don't believe he ever said that. It's prob'ly one of those...ex-agg-er-ations. *smirk* heh heh heh.

Kerry will jump on this, believe me. And even if he doesn't, Wesley Clark and General McPeak already have. Clarks nails him on it:
Today George W. Bush made a very compelling and thoughtful argument for why he should not be reelected. In his own words, he told the American people that "... a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your Commander in Chief".

President Bush couldn't be more right. He jumped to conclusions about any connection between Saddam Hussein and 911. He jumped to conclusions about weapons of mass destruction. He jumped to conclusions about the mission being accomplished. He jumped to conclusions about how we had enough troops on the ground to win the peace. And because he jumped to conclusions, terrorists and insurgents in Iraq may very well have their hands on powerful explosives to attack our troops, we are stuck in Iraq without a plan to win the peace, and Americans are less safe both at home and abroad.

By doing all these things, he broke faith with our men and women in uniform. He has let them down. George W. Bush is unfit to be our Commander in Chief.General Merrill McPeak:
The President seems to think Senator Kerry could not possibly be criticizing him since the President thinks he has never made a mistake. Let’s be perfectly clear: it is the President who dropped the ball. Senator Kerry is being critical of George Bush, not the troops. By embarking on the line of attack, George Bush is deflecting blame from him over to the military. This is beneath contempt.Even Rudy Guliani, who's lost my respect completely, had this to say in defense of Bush, who in the very same speech said Kerry was denigrating our troops by criticizing him:
No matter how you try to blame it on the president the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?Is nothing Bush's fault? Ever? Or anyone else in his administration? Can they take responsibility for anything? Is there anyone left on earth whom these people haven't passed the buck to?

These cocks will do anything to win. How guys like Hack, Snook and Grey - all of whom I have great respect and affection for - can sit there and say they support our troops and still pull the lever for Bush is astonishing to me. I just don't get it.

Mr. Bor, Meet Mr. Ring

No offence...

I would think a Brit would have some interest in this, considering you're the only other country on the planet that is making any type of significant contribution in Iraq, but whatever.

Is nothing Bush's fault? Ever? Or anyone else in his administration? Can they take responsibility for anything? Apparently not. Just once, I'd love the hear Bush say, "My bad."

EDIT: WOO HOO!!!!! 2000 posts! :cool:

Well, I lost a lot of confidence in Blair when he blindly followed Bush like a lap dog anyway... theres nothing I can do to affect the situation, so I just leave it with 'em.

So then I just sit back, chuck some football on the telly and crack a tinny open.

Rudy Guliani's a complete sellout.

As for Kerry jumping on this, I have a lot of respect for him, but he's missed some critical chances in this race, and I have a feeling this will be another that he misses.

Please, somebody tell John Kerry it's Christmas. This has "home run" written all over it.

Seriously, between this, the faith vs reality-based community stuff, the weapons going missing and the new hostilities in Iraq (conveniently a few days before the election), I fail to see how anyone with a working synapse and any critical faculties could not see Bush for what he is.

Okay, so this is an isolated election issue, and won't change anyone's mind if they didn't feel homeland security was a top priority. But I can't believe how amazingly stupid a statement this is.

This late into the race, all the undecided are already decided. The campaign effort now has shifted to getting your people to get out to vote and find "ways" to get 'not your people' to not get out to vote. Unless radical things happened (ie, just hypothetically speaking, another attack on american soil which connects to the 350 tons missing explosives), voters' decisions are not going change drastically. Bush's statement discussed here might be useful but not crucial.