[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
...All in all Bush has done BETTER THAN ANYONE COULD given what he has had to confront in office.

...

2. War on Terror/Iraq War



[/ QUOTE ]

See the thread I started on mission changes in Iraq. Bush gets criticism when he changes the mission without building a political consensus. He's done this since 2003. He should expect criticism and deserves it.

See various posts on inconsistency in conducting a war to keep terrorists from carrying out attacks in the U.S. and having a porous border where millions gain access to the U.S. illegally. Seemingly people don't point this out enough IMO. It could be that the "War on Terror" is bogus and thus a porous border with Mexico isn't a major security risk. It could be that the "War on Terror" is legitimate and thus a porous border with Mexico is a major security risk. Bush seems to be stating that the "War on Terror" is legitimate and that a porous border with Mexico is no problem security wise. An inconsistent viewpoint at best. One might be able to argue that the last go round with the comprehensive immigration bill would have tightened security on the border considerably. If that's the case I'd sure like read why that is. Haven't heard one person among government officials and/or talking heads state that the failure to pass that bill meant that the U.S. missed a chance to enhance security a great deal. The overwhelming complaints I hear/read about were that a chance was missed to give illegals living in the states fair access to U.S. citizenship and/or legal status in the States. Border security was held hostage to changing the status of illegals working in the country. No reason why that should be the case IMO. One can be resolved without the other.