How many times to we have to go this route with these republicans. Time has dimmed my memory of the press secretaries of those two presidents but the words sound the same. As we know, Nixon could not survive his lies to fill out a second term. Reagan survived the Iran-Contra mess because the Democrates did not have the votes to impeach. If the Democrates could somehow take control of Congress in 2006, I think an impeachment would be in order. Because, if Bush did not know what Rove, etal. were doing in this matter, he is too stupid be president and if he did know, then he is too criminal to be president. These people seem never to learn that a freely elected president does not create an imperial presidency.

For more than three years now, we have heard the Bush administration accused of being "misleading" about the war in Iraq. We have heard them be accused of "dissembling" about the economy, Plamegate, taxes, healthcare, etc. The truth is that George W. Bush lied repeatedly about the facts he used to support his war in Iraq. It is no different than the lie Lyndon B. Johnson told regarding the events in the Gulf of Tonkin some 40 years ago to support a war in Viet Nam. Johnson's lie cost more that 58,000 dead American soldiers. Bush's lie has cost about 2000 dead American soldiers and counting. By the time we have spent 15 years in Iraq, we will be approaching another 58,000 dead American Soldiers based on a lie. George W. Bush is not "misleading" and he is not "dissembling." He is a liar and we should always describe him as such.

I am inclined to think that Charles Krauthammer is taking his directions from the White House rather than the other way around. I think he is a lot like Judy Miller in that he will write whatever is passed to him from Rove and co. in order to assist the Bush administration.

If or when Libby lied about Wilson/Plame is not the real issue. What we know for a fact is that Dick Cheney and George W. Bush KNOWINGLY lied about the Niger connection with Saddam in Iraq. They lied about Iraq being connected to 9/11. They lied about a connection between Saddam and Osama. It seems to me that we should be pursuing the lies we know for certain to be fact. I think it would be very appropriate for Mr. Fitzgerald to indict both Cheney and Bush since they are the essential liars.

We have known these facts since before the war in Iraq and certainly well before the election of 2004. We knew there were no WMD, no 9/11 connection, no Al-Qaida connection, no purchase of "yellow cake" from Niger, ect. The real question is how did these people get reelected! To address that issue, one only has to look to the Evangelical Christian/Right-to-Life bloc. This group has always been the solid rock of the Bush politcal foundation. These people have been so eager to establish a theocracy that the ignored the obvious dishonesty and criminality of their leadership. I wonder how these people are able to reconcile the death of 2001 American Soldiers and more than 25000 Iraqi civilians with their preachings on the "sanctity" of life. We must not only root out this criminal administration, but we also must isolate and marginalize those who would change our democracy to a theocracy.

Imagine that! George W. Bush telling a lie about the reason for withdrawing Harriet Mier's nomination for the supreme court.

The Bush administration only acted as any of us would have predicted in such a situation. Politicians do whatever it takes to stay in office including lying to the electorate. The real betrayal in this matter was committed by Matthew Cooper and Judy Miller. If they had written what they knew at the time they knew it, we would not be wondering if the election might have come out different.

I think Dubya can't help but smirk and laugh once in awhile because he really has pulled the wool over the eyes of the American public. I believe the war in Iraq has accomplished what it was intended to accomplish. War presidents are more likely to get elected. The Dubya crowd new they did not win in 2000 and 9/11 gave them an opportunity to good to pass up. The "war on terrorism" needed a face and a location. Iraq served that need better than Afganistan. The Dubya crowd created a phony pretex for going to war knowing that it would last through the election of 2004. It worked! Dubya and the boys and girl went laughing into a second term which is all they wanted. That's why they have lost interest in Iraq. They will leave it to be cleaned up by the next administration while they make billions for their cronies (Halliburton) and tax the poor to favor the rich. If I had pulled off such a momumental hoax on America, I would be laughing too!

Gnashing teeth about how Bush can resurrect his presidency misses the point, I think. I believe the Bushies came to power in 2000 with three primary goals. First was to have the presidency for 8 years (war in Iraq). Second was to stack the Supreme Court with people beholden to the Evangelical/Right-to-Life wing of the party. Thirdly, was to oversee the most massive transfer of wealth in our country's history (tax cuts for the wealthy). Those three goals have been and/or are being accomplished regardless of what the polls say. Those goals will be accomplished even if the Democrates control Congress in 2006 and impeach Bush. This administration has never intended to leave the Republican Party in a position to retain office after this debacle. We need to stop focusing on the Bushies and begin to work to undo all of the damage that has been accomplished by this administration. This task will take decades to complete and begins with the elections of 2006.