[richwolo]

No matter how bad Clinton may have been (he was) our concern should be now. Only GWB can hurt this country NOW.

[bmwcyle]

You forgot Congress, Courts, your state officials,,etc.

[AmericaUnited]

No matter how bad Clinton may have been (he was) our concern should be now. Only GWB can hurt this country NOW.

Wrong! GWB can not act in a vacuum. He needed a certain number like minded voters, legislators and judges to accomplish what must be done NOW. Part of that process is making sure people know what was done THEN.

[Eva]

No, Clarke has politicized this battle and compared the Bush administration to the Clinton administration. Most of the criticism of the Bush administration by Clarke was done in the light of what Clarke claims was done under the Clinton administration. Many of his lies concern those comparisons, such as when he claimed in the interview that the Clinton administration took no action concerning Osama Bin Laden after 1998, that they formed a plan but never acted on it. Now he claims that they met every day and had big plans. The 2000 save in Washington state had nothing, NOTHING to do with his stupid plans, it was just dumb luck that the border guard searched the trunk of that car. The searches are done, based on random computer selection, and answers to questions. This guy is a liar and needs to be shown as one.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Notwithstanding the fact that 80% of military officers are Republicans, America has not elected to national political prominance a single Republican who earned a reputation for valor in Vietnam. The closest to a counterexample is John McCain, and he is more of a famous victim than a renowned warrior. Oliver North is the most famous Republican with a reputation for valor, and his bid for a senate seat failed.

There are and have been Democratic senators who earned medals in Vietnam. But Democratic veterans of Vietnam of whatever reputation for valor have uniformly opposed the idea of other men winning reputations for valor. Ever since Vietnam the Democratic Party has in fact been the anti-valor party.

No matter how bad Clinton may have been (he was) our concern should be now. Only GWB can hurt this country NOW.

You know perfectly well that this November the country will choose between GWB and the Democratic nominee, presumably Kerry. The operative choice, hence the operative comparison, in this election year is not between George Bush and Audie Murphy or Dwight Eisenhower or even Ronald Reagan. The operative choice is between George Bush and John Kerry.

Kerry may have medals for valor, may even have richly earned them. But having publicly condemned the military as an institution, and having symbolically returned his medals, Kerry is the anti-valor candidate. If you think Kerry could or would create a scene of military exuberance such as Bush triggered by landing on the Lincoln, I think whatever you are smoking should be illegal. Bush manifestly has the highest regard for the members of our armed forces, and Kerry manifestly has the highest regard for - John Kerry.

And if Bush is better than Kerry then damage to Bush's reputation - and invidious comparison to Clinton is certainly intended to no other purpose - is damage to America.