Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
As Ty said this is quite a strong statement. I am not trying to ask an "LSAT" question, but could you elabortate a little bit, and tell me what you think Bush was supposed to do about this (in your prior post you implied Bush should have done more about this)?
|
He's struck me as too much of a polite gentleman in the face of dishonorable attacks. State leaks like a sieve, its Dem holdovers undercut his policy decisions, and he seems to sit back, click his tongue, and say "kids will be kids", and nothing changes. Newsies publish all sorts of classified info, because it's Bush's secret, not because it's truly bad info, and we've seen . . how many prosecution attempts? CIA gives Kerry a constant blowjob for months leading up to the last prez election, and . . . how many heads rolled? Hell, it's gotten so blatant that the NYT alderman can call Bush's "they really shouldn't do that too much more" criticism "vicious." Well, given the range of Bush's reactions in the past, yeah, it was relatively vicious.
It's only been recently that he's actually seemed to show that he sort of disapproves of the leaks. And, when I see an actual prosecution, I'll go back to thinking differently. But, to me, he's just been a gadwawful wuss about this.
