"Actionable Intelligence"? What Funk and Bushwack did he dig that one out of ?

He just keeps gettin funnier!

Bingo Phil R!

I would not put it past this evil administration to do just that. Anything to retain control and crush American freedoms.

I won't share what else I think has been staged, planned, and executed by these people.

There is no way we are going into northwest Pakistan.

That area has been home to a few million people spread out over various tribes and towns.

The only time military troops were even there, there was a british expedition in which only ONE troop member of several thousand came back alive.

You could hide Rhode Island there and no one would find it…

As for the whole presidential name…

You may totally disagree with President Bush, but he is the president still.

I'm not the biggest fan of Senator Clinton, but she has earned her title by winning an election and trying to do her job… so I would address her as Senator Clinton if I ever met her.

Wigmor, you said "Britons of South Asian descent." That's a contradiction. Britons are the English, Welsh, Scottish and North Irish. Asian people are not British. They may assimilate to the culture somewhat, but that's a different story. More accurately, you should say "South Asian people living in Britian." Britons are Britons and Asians are Asians; let's not confuse this matter.

Unusually astute answer from Dubya, shows he can let the stupid cowboy facade slip now and again!
"Paks" has been used quite a lot as shorthand for Pakistanis. It doesnt have the same meaning in the US as "Paki" in the UK. Its rather like using "Brit" in Northern Ireland…its a derogatory term among the Nationalist community, but the rest of the world uses it as slang…
No need for the Democrats to wet themselves over it!

I've been trying and trying to think and articulate what my major problem with Hilary Clinton is… I've really struggled with this, as I think she'd be an okay president, far better than Bush anyway.

Then, just now on the drive home, it hit me. Now I know why I don't like her nearly as much as Obama or Edwards. The reason is…exactly what I said. I think she'd be competent, she'd be okay. We'd skate through the next 8 years without attacking anyone blatantly and there'd be some incremental good done. But…THAT'S NOT WHAT WE NEED!!!

Our next president must be a visionary. We need a leader in the truest sense of the word. I think Hilary would be very content with all the extra power her branch of goverment would have been left by the Bush administration.

Instead of reversing 8 years of damage, I think she'd be perfectly happy to keep the status quo and keep things like the patriot act and the overall "war on terror" humming along nicely for her benefit. That wouldn't serve the country well. We need somebody to come in with an almighty bulldozer and overhaul the system.

Our literal survival is as stake in this next election. We are facing global warming, healthcare that's a joke, a world that shows us no compassion and a lot of hate. We have a culture of greed and instant gratification. I don't honestly believe that Hilary Clinton has the sheer vision and courage to make the kind of major changes that need to happen. Even if she logically sees what needs to be done, even if she can talk about it, she can't inspire others to pull it off. I don't believe she'll unite the congress much less the states. I don't believe she'll overcome her lobbist buddies to give us all equal and fair healthcare… she couldn't do it before, why now?

I DO believe that Barrack Obama or John Edwards could do those things, especially Obama. I think he represents the kind of visionary leader that the country craves and so badly needs.

Hilary is old school politics, corporate interests, and in general a blase candidate that seems content to rest on her laurels and her reputation.

She scares me, because I find her uninspiring and I want to be inspired, I want to be told that Americans can sacrifice with the best, take our knocks and handle the truth. She feels like my babysitter instead of my president. Obama or Edwards feel like they understand the vibe of the country.

I cried when I heard Obama speak during Kerry's convention, because he was so right, there are no blue or red states, we're all The UNITED STATES. I crave simple truths, even if they hurt. I want to sacrifice to make the world better and to unsure that my children's children still live in a free country. I don't want the country I love to be known as an imperial empire, a dictatorial regime bringing democracy on the backs of missles and bullets.

I want the world to know the good people I know. I want the sort of knowledge, class and courage that the best politicians in history have given this country. It's time for another Abe Lincoln, another JFK, because only a leader that can harness the belief currently lying dormant in this country can pull us safely into the future. I never, ever want to be known as the generation that lost our freedoms to fear and lost our world to neglect and greed. Hilary can't inspire that. She just can't.

The worst thing that can happen to the next presidential election is that it’s close. If it’s close, the Republicans can use caging, intimidation and voter apathy to steal it yet again. If it’s Hilary, it’s gonna be close, and I’m scared.

I do, however, believe that Barrack Obama can inspire what needs to be done. He can not only inspire it, he can pull it off. He can do it. He can bring a million people to the polls that have never even bothered to vote before. They may steal 100,000 votes, but can they stop the other 900,000?

Give him a chance. He and Edwards together would make a great ticket. The Clintons had their chance, lets not live in the past, lets figure out what will make the future.

Obama/Edwards in '08.

I might be inclined to call him President Bush if he had actually been elected to the office, instead of having it handed to him by the Supreme Court. He does not act like my President; he acts like a dictator.
And I agree that next fall will see much progress in capturing Bin Laden and resolving things in Iraq. Let us pray that he hasn't bombed Iran by then!

Hey Kenny from NY,
You are absolutely right, President Shrub will be remembered by the entire world as, hands down, the WORST president of the United States EVER! And all you intellectual giants who voted for him and still sport those Bush/Chenny bumper stickers should be forced to forever leave them on, much like the orange and red license plates that DUI offenders must have. That way the rest of us will be aware that the knuckle-head in the car in front of us poses a threat not only to himself, but to all others they may come in contact with.
Respect a liar, murderer, hypocrite, buffoon, imbecile, racist, idiot? lol Not a chance.

It is great to read all these blogs. Wake up America! If a spineless Democrat had been elected in 2004 I would venture to say the US would have been attacked again. Muslim extremists know one thing and that is hatred and they hate America almost as much as they hate Israel.Yes President Bush has made some mistakes as have other Presidents and maybe he is not as smooth as Bill Clinton but Clinton had plenty of chances to capture or kill Bin Laden and others and failed. The difference between President Bush and the Dems is that he has the guts to go after these extremists and in the long run America will be better off for it. As he said this is a fight for a generation. Then maybe it is time for a change. Maybe if a Dem is elected in 2008 they can meet with the extremists to discuss how the problem can be resolved! Just make sure they wear a teflon collar around their necks.

Respect is earned, not blindly given. Bushie and his followers will just have to accept that I will strive to never call him "President" or even "Mr." He has definitely lowered the expectations of the Oval Office down several notches. His lack of eloquence makes him sound like a babbling buffoon next to the likes of Prime Minister Tony Blair. Ever since Bushie lied about being a bi-partisan leader and a "President" to all Americans, he lost all credibility. This of course is compounded by all of his other lies, especially the latest one about how sacrificing our civil liberties and civil rights are necessary in the war on terror.

For goodness sakes, read a style guide! The customary usage is to write "President [name]" on initial mention, and "Mr. [name]" or "the President" afterwards- just like CNN did. There is absolutely nothing disrespectful about the practice- it was used for President Clinton, for President Bush's father, for President Reagan, and on back.

This recent epidemic of CNN-bashers whining about it only shows their ignorance.

CNN will probally take this down but the reason why Clinton is getting all of the media’s attention and slants is because they (the media) are first and foremost a business. True reporting does not exist anymore. Only pun dents, party hype men and stockholders control the press. In the 90’s Bill Clinton passed bills that gave media corporations more opportunities to improve their profits by allowing them to buy up more media outlets. This was great for business but bad for free press. In the 80's the media stopped investigative reporting and allowed the political parties to dictate and manipulate the stories presented to the public. There are some good reporters left in some media outlets but they are hampered down and sometimes silenced by the financial/business needs of their news organizations. Bill Moyers did a report on how the media helped to sell the Iraq war for Bush and the republicans. In the end it all comes down to money and profits. With 24-hour news stations competing with each other they all have to by law, improve ratings and profits for their shareholders. This is why we have sensational news.

The news organizations:

1. Owe the Clinton's for improving their profits and business opportunities in the 90’s. That is one of the reasons why they favor her in coverage.

2. People in the political world make money off each other. Reporters pun dents and politicians all need something to write about in their books. The Clinton's make a great news story good or bad.

3. Some women in the media (rightly so because of their struggles) are sympathetic to Hillary’s as a presidential candidate. Sometimes it clouds their criticism of her.

3. Obama represents moving against the establishment. If he wins what does that say to all of the baby boomers in charge. It says a trend could start and they could be next to be voted out or lose their jobs to a younger, idealistic, honest upstart. Example: Look at how Clinton (some might say) Dodd and Bidden have been in office for years but do not have the same numbers of Obama a new comer to the scene.

Personally I believe Obama represents transparency, honesty and hope for all. For me Hillary does not represent change but the establishment. In America it seems the establishment views the world as winners, losers and ill-fated dreamers. I am a strong Obama supporter but I fear a lot of American's want to be told what to think say and do. We are a country of conformist. I'll support Obama to the end but fear it is only an ill-fated dream. May god bless America, people around the world and hope for the future.

Unbelievable… How many times has "W" said "We will get the job done" during his presidency??? And how many things has he actually finished? Does he really think that we are so ignorant that we will just keep believing his confident statements?

Wynter,

Wrote, "I can call him Mr. as I never voted for the dimwit (ie. “he ain’t my president)"

You can disparage President Bush, ridicule him, etc. It will not change the fact that he is a two-term President of the United States. His name will be remembered throughout the ages of history and all that you can muster in this life - your rants and insignificant blog will fade into oblivion.

Please continue your barking as a dog to it's Master.

So, just to be clear: Clinton, Bush and Obama are all in agreement over Obama's comments with regard to Pakistan. The only differences being Clinton says to think it but not say it, and Bush agrees but says it won't happen.

sounds like voters only have once choice if they want someone who is both honest and not diluted.

why is Obama taking so much heat on this again?

Good Lord! You people do whine a bit about titles, Mr. vs. Pres. I can call him Mr. as I never voted for the dimwit (ie. "he ain't my president"). And to those that need to whine about CNN being so pro-Clinton. Sheesh! Just because she is riding high in the polls and looking like she is going to possibly be our next president, I think they might be thinking about comparing her stand against Bush's. We are in a political race people. When Obama puts his foot in his mouth.. it's news. If she does.. it's news.
The only thing I dislike lately about CNN is that they "softball" the news. Too much fluff and not enough news. If you want to whine about political influence in the news then turn on FOX. They have the GOP market cornered.

Telling it like I see it,
Wynter
(wynterdragon.blogspot.com)

Bush was very clear in not singling out any one candidate," …. trying to get me to opine about what candidates are saying, whether they be Republicans or Democrats". But CNN puts it as "Bush on Obama". Of course it is not yellow journalism, its just journalism with an agenda!

Uhhhh… where does Bush say towards Obama "Leave me out of it?" Steve Brusk said leave me out of it, not Bush. CNN really is trying to force people to think that Obama's statement about Pakistan was wrong and Hillary was right.

Why "Bush on Obama" and not "Bush on Election" or "Bush on 2008″ or "Bush on Candidates?" Any of those three would be more accurate headlines.

If you knew what Bush was going to do would you have voted for him and would we be in this mess?No way!We need to know what the candidates will do to resolve the destructive issues before us before we vote,not after we vote.

With or without President Bush's comments, his administration's performance is center stage in the 2008 elections. There is no doubt in any objective observation an aggressive and stubborn, self-indulgent sociopathic effort has been perpetrated for the benefit of a few and with the bold deceptions and excessive costs consistently passed to the many. For the last six plus years the Bush administration, with the full support of the Republican party, has been constant in everything proposed/done to be pursuing a private agenda for the benefit of Special Interests and a select few while giving the average American only the subterfuge, apathy and drastic costs. Today all politicians are challenged with the need for great financial support, which simply encourages the opportunity for 'big money' to buy their way in. The Democrats have their faults and short commings but the wealthy and powerful have obviously had their way with the Republicans and President Bush, likely have plans to continue and it is just really scary to think how far it can go with 'more of the same'.

The less Devil Bush talks the better!

I guess the only reason Georgie has not been assassinated is that the alternative (Dick Cheney) as president is even more frightening!!

Pretty pitiful when people get excited about the President's approval rating going from 32% to 36% with a margin era of 3 +/-points. Bush has been a dismal failure and his marketing machine just knows how to instill enough fear in the people to convince a third of them that we still need to believe in his "vision" of a winnable war in Iraq.

Steve Brusk, you need to change your headline. Nowhere in this article does Bush direct his comments to Obama. Are you that desperate for readers? What a joke. I can't blame you though because Obama is the biggest star in politics. It's pretty normal for people to attack the best! It happens in Sports as well.

It would be nice to see a president who says "Pakistanies" rather than Paks. Seriously, this guy went to Yale?

stanley from pittsburgh

Wait to the next CNN/Opinion Poll comes out. They will have Clinton beating Senator Obama and Senator Edwards by 25 points! They will have the next NH poll with her in the lead too.

The Clinton News Network is worse than the Fox Noise Channel in its bias reporting.

I guess the fear of God doesn't bother them.

The criminal nature of this administration continues to shock and awe me. I just found out that Tim Griffen, infamous vote cager and architect of Bush's 2000 Florida election caging fraud, and also Karl Rove's protege whom was under investigation by the Arkansas Attorney, only to find himself in the dude's job after he was fired, whis helping to run Fred Thompson's campaign. I guess they figure they did it twice, they can do it again to us.

I'm so ashamed of my government. It hurts me to even see Bush's face on here.

Rissa, "Mr." has long been an accepted title for the President. There is no disrespect in using it. If they were just calling him "George" or "that idiot at the podium," that would be disrespectful.

This article uses "President Bush" initially, and then uses either "Bush" or "Mr. Bush" from then on. This is in line with how most publications use these honorifics, and how most have been doing it for decades. If you're trying to accuse CNN of liberal bias, this particular bit of "evidence" isn't going to cut it.

Do you object to calling him Mr.Bush? He's lucky to get that level of courtesy. Hey Middle-America? Wake up!! He's a lying criminal and isn't even man enough to own up to any one of his misdeeds. Instead, he let's his cronies take the fall or , while he continues to take a dump, all over our Constitution.

Is this journalist dumb? Moreso does CNN have an agenda? i asked these questions 'cos there's absolute nothing in the content that relates to the headline.

A reputable organisation like CNN should not stoop this low….For many of us who aren't US citizens we love CNN and constantly defend her even when allegations are made against them but in such a open glaring case like this, what do we do?

I am not a US citizen so I have no stake in her politics. My response is purely the defense of journalism and for that matter the kind coming from CNN.

I believe that the human race has common sense to know that President Bush and his administration will have some miraculous discoveries before their term ends. Surprised, Dumbyah?

I'm looking forward to at least ten years-worth of blaming Bush/Cheney for everything negative that happens. I can see myself in 2013 explaining to somebody with a weathered "W" sticker on their car bumper that we are still paying the bills for the war in Iraq. I'll ask them how they feel about voting for this guy TWICE!

My God he's an idiot.

I agree. Have a little more respect for our President and call him by his title.

So the Clinton News Network is pairing comments on Obama from both Hillary and President Bush. I am confused, because normally CNN only tells the story of what Clinton says and leaves Obama's comments out of the argument. But here they are showing exactly why Clinton is the establishment candidate, even comparing her to Bush, which is just what Obama is trying to do. Thanks Clinton News Network. Please give the public more Pro-Hillary-Anti-Obama coverage, because we are not capable of reading through your spin.

cnn needs to quit being the clinton news network. it's so obvious now, you guys just need to stop

The media, including CNN is trying too hard to find someone "slamming" Obama for his comments on Pakistan etc. Bush here has said absolutely nothing about Obama, yet someone still conjures up the headline.

One of the few intelligent utterances…

This is not Bush speaking directly to Obama.

This is just Bush saying he won't get involved in the Presidential race. Another misleading headline.

That can be, he is the core of politics right now.

I'm glad Geroge is staying out of it. Whoever wins will have to clean up the lttle mess he has made of the world. Further, there are candidates, from both parties mind you, for whom is even unworthy of licking the bottom of their shoes. Yes, he is lower than any Republican candidate on the horizon…he's had more time and opportunity to betray us all.

Do humnaity a favor George, and just be a lame duck for the rest of your term.

Mr. Bush??? Do you call Bill Clinton: Mr. Clinton?? I believe it is President Bush. I guess CNN doesn't hide it's disdain for the president anymore.

Let's wait a see if he is true to his word after the parties select their candidate for President. I bet he will be doing a lot of opining.

why does cnn hate obama? bush never responded to any one candidate, he never said directly to obama to leave him out of it, bush is too smart for that, please report fairly when it comes to obama, thx.

Contrary to Clinton’s philosophy, I would rather have a president who says what he thinks, instead of saying what he or she thinks the opinion polls want to hear, as Hillary does. We must take bold moves against these terrorist organizations, and I personally don’t think we need a president who is afraid to speak the truth because he or she are afraid of a little political fallout in Pakistan.

Hillary only pretends for the polls, Obama is a leader to the people.

His press conference was very embarrassing to this nation.
We need a president who actually knows what he is saying!

I, for one, am glad to hear these words come out of Bush's mouth. When it comes to National Security issues like what's going on in Pakistan (certainly a volatile issue at this moment) I think it's important for these things to be taken seriously from all perspectives. What I find disturbing is that between Obama, Bush, and Clinton, Hillary seems to be the odd one out when it comes to speaking frankly about what I think is probably the most important issue in the headlines today. Is Bush's response calculated? Yes. Is Obama's based on a hypothetical? To a small degree. But playing it "close to the vest" as Hillary seems to be doing is NOT what this nation needs at a time when reasoned discourse is getting rarer by the minute. It's too easy for democrats to paint Bush as an example of everything wrong with politics, but this doesn't mean that what we need is an anti-Bush; and I'm afraid that's what Hillary is trying to be.

When President Bush's name is used, use the title President in front of his name. He is the president and for yall to not recognize that title is just childish after almost 8 yrs in office.

Thank God! The less George W. Bush opens his mouth the better! He's PATHETIC!!

Did Bush really call people from Pakistan "the Paks?" Is that short for "Paki"? I've never heard that abbreviation used before.

are you fine folks working on another anti-Obama piece for tomorrow? I hope the streak continues, maybe regurgitate how McCain thinks Barack is naive. Or throw in Hillary's criticism again, or sneak in Dodd's skepticism of Obama… maybe Biden?

I agree let’s leave Bush “out of it”; he has been “out of it” for quite a while. With Bush’s low ratings the majority of voters probably wouldn’t take Bush’s endorsement for anything—most would go the other way.

Wasn't it the President, after 911, who said that the United States would go after terrorists and countries that support and harbor terrorists; to flush them out wherever they live? Why criticize Barack Obama when we need to put more pressure on Pakistan to eliminate terrorists in their country.

Wow and how long its been since the WTC fell? man they must be up day and night trying to figure out where Bin laden is.

it is "amusing" to me how the MEDIA simply fails to mention that Hillary said she echoed the same thing a few hours after Obama's speech?

Watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tlx3ADyAnzk

I think it's a bit of being a hypocrit to speak on both end of the issue.

The question should be, "Would this candidates will NOT act if they found an actionable intelligence?"

"Paks?" Why say Paks as opposed to Pakistanis? The word "Paks" or "Pakis" were used as a derogatory term for Britons of South Asian descent. Another demonstration of Mr. Bush's either inherent insensitivity or laziness.

"both the Paks and the Americans"

Wow, he was about one syllable away there from a racial slur.

PREDICTION:

Osama Bin Laden will be caught and paraded before the world - Fall 2008.

Right before the President Elections.

It's stupid for reporters to ask an active President to comment on foreign policy statements made by a candidate.

Yes it is good he didn't take the bait.

What do the expect him to say?