Bush has led this country down a terrible road paved by incompetence and denial. This man has never been successful at anything he has done in his life and always had his family to solve his problems. This man was never qualified to be president. Had his last name been Smith or Jones, he could have never been elected. He and his cronies used his last name to get Bush elected, never mind what the responsibilities of being president were.
This man will not admit to failure. It will be interesting to watch him in the future as private citizen deny how the Iraq disaster was his fault. He will give excuse after excuse why he failed; always trying to shift the blame, just like he has done all his life. But, there will be one big difference then; he will not have the big Republican spin machine to accent he his lies and promote his distortions. The more he talks, the more America will rationalize how delusional this man is. There are two likely scenarios for Bush in the future. One is that he be ignore by the press and he eventually will just fade away. If Bush is smart he will not talk about Iraq in the future. Just like McNamara and Vietnam, Bush should avoid the issue and let it pass. That will take the rest of his life to do so. No public lecture tours except for some isolated hard core political group.
The other is a more unforgiving one. One, which he will be exploited by the media and shows how delusional he really is. He will be asked to speak many times about his Presidency, now without all the handlers he has now. He will show his lack of command of the facts and he will speak of denial about his failures. This will go on for a long time. It will become a circus. I’m sorry to say that will probably be the case. His parents and family will suffer from all of this. But, so has the country under his Presidency.

The Nostardamus story is hogwash, but it's funny.

I think Nostradamus said it best: "come the Millenium in the year 2000, the Village Idiot will come forward and be declared the leader." Once again, we have proven the prophet to be correct.

The fact that Bush thinks he would be a strong asset on the campaign trail for Republican candidates prooves that he is delusional. I'm even more scared of what he might do before his term ends.

Bill from Streamwood, Ill. Right On!
I get sick of these Republicans now trying to distance themselves from the unpopular Bush just to get elected. They have all supported him in the past! All of the Republican candidates have contributed to the mess we are in today! I would not vote Republican!

Neither Rudy Giuliani nor John McCain should be happy with or without Disaster George Bush. If, if, if, Giuliani or Mccain nominated, and if, if, if either one of them elected president, either Giuliani or McCain will be worse than Disaster George Bush. At the present time we need a "PRESIDENT" to govern. WE DON'T NEED A RULER LIKE DISASTER GEORGE BUSH.
When Guiliani or McCain talk, they sound opportunists, confused, misguided, old very old, tasteless, hyprocrite, aloof, boring, sharlatans…Eight years of Disaster George Bush, the GREATEST ASSET OF OUR COUNTRY, HEY… is enough. We definitely don't need another DISASTER.
The best recommendation we can wish to Rudy Giuliani and John McCain is RETIREMENT. Retirement, while it is not too late yet.
Republican from Florida who doesn't wish any luck to Giuliani or to McCain.

There was a president from Texas
Who kept confusing folks about a nexus
Between the terrorists who attacked us
And the sorry despot from Iraq's

Now his legacy is in tatters
As he found that all that matters
Can be exposed by phone tappers–
But don't worry, you can fax us.

What the canidates don't want the spoiled little rich kid to come play with them, why I never.

For 7 1/2 years they have failed to set forth any policies or debate that did not meet with the approval of Bush. They had a chance to rein him in and establish a working bi-partisan government, but they did not, and now they don't want anything to do with him, unbelievable.

If they don't agree with his policies and actions why did they not have the backbones to stand up to him before, but now it's getting to election time and they want nothing to do with him, hypocrites each and every one.

By the way I was a Repulican up until January 2000. What Regan did for the party, Bush has managed to undo and then some.

Georgie Porgie sat on the wall
Georgie Porgie had a Big Fall
And none of his repubnicants
And none of his friends
Will ever put Georgie back together
again.

But Georgie is Arrogant
And Georgie is Proud
And Georgie keeps hiding
Beneath his black shroud.

But Georgie will be uncovered
And the History Books will tell
About his disgraceful reign as leader
And the war he tried to sell.

To all the Bush supporters here who cite the fact that we are safe because of the fact that we have not been attacked again since 9/11.

How many years went by between the first attack on the World Trade Center and the second attack?

Just because terrorists haven't struck since 9/11 doesn't mean they won't again.

We know they all support the President 100% in all his policies and decisions. I remember them explaining to us that it was despicable and cowardly to do anything else.

Remember when war profiteering used to be a bad thing? And leaving children uninsured lest we become communists was not acceptable?

We need to stop trying to determine who is the greatest failure in the Bush Adminisration. We need to focus on the FOLLOWERS of this failed policy. I don't think ALL Republicans should be lumped in the failure column with Bush, however I do think the American people need to start listening and evaluating what these elected officials are saying and we need to vote accordingly.

To Richard from Florida. States have every right to refer to their electorates on a wide range of matters whenever they choose - as is the case with Florida, I believe. It is certainly not within the remit of the unelected national committees of either party to interfere with that process. Having said that, I believe it is actually legislated in New Hampshire that they hold the first primary (why, I don't know - they haven't selected a successful Democratic challenger since Jimmy Carter).
Maybe the solution is to separate the timing of the state and federal responsibilities of the voters - the choice of national candidate according to a rotation set by the national committees in consultation with the state organisations and funded by the federal government. It is ridiculous for the DNC to threaten to disenfranchise Florida voters for something over which they have no control - Florida especially given the recent history - and probably illegal too. Another Florida election is decided in the courts and one party at least walks away looking pretty stupid.

well WHAT DO YOU EXPECT FROM THE PARTY OF COURRUPTION.

I wouldn't know why they wouldn't welcome him to thier campaigns. He is the perfect poster child for the Republicans. A blue blood son of priviledge whose mistakes have been quietly smoothed over and who has never heard the word no.A cowboy characature with an aversion to horses and a facination with big belt buckles. The perfect republican fantasy candidate.

Bush will go down in history as one of America's greatest presidents???

Oh really, and when will "Pigs Fly???"

Posted By Sherry AllOver Texas : September 24, 2007 12:48 am
"The more I think about it, the Democrats should get Bush to campaign for THEM! He's the poster boy for why you shouldn't vote Republican."

This is exactly why I always say there is no need to bash Republicans. They are just too good at making fools of themselves. And since they do that, it saves us the trouble and we can then spend our time and effort on something more productive. And I am not talking about such fine endeavors as making sure humans and fish can co-exist.

Privately, Republican strategists agree their nominee will lose next fall if the general election is a referendum on Bush. They say GOP candidates are wise to distance themselves from the president now, given his unpopularity among the public at large.

It's too late. They should have thought of this before Bush did em' in.

To James, Olaya Street, Riyadh:
Much as I hate to "lose" my Florida primary voting power, we need to bring an end to everyone trying to top everyone else with earlier and earlier elections. It just encourages more political contributions from special interests and wastes millions of dollars. Our Democratic state Senator Bill Nelson has proposed a national rotating system for states that would equalize things. We have to do something even if it means losing my vote this time. With several good Democratic candidates going against apparently hypocritical Republicans,I can still cast a vote that matters in November.

I hope CNN won't delete this post.
As in case, your not aware. Our world is in serious jeopardy currently. The following story compliments of CNN News puts this in proper perspective.
And puts Ron Paul's notion of pulling the US out the United Nations in the category is belongs.

Brzezinski: U.S. in danger of 'stampeding' to war with Iran

"Former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski likened U.S. officials' saber rattling about Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions to similar bellicose statements made before the start of the Iraq war.

I think the administration, the president and the vice president particularly, are trying to hype the atmosphere, and that is reminiscent of what preceded the war in Iraq," Brzezinski told CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer" on Sunday.

In October 2002, five months before Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was toppled for what the United States said was his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, President Bush said, "Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof — the smoking gun — that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."

No evidence was found that Iraq was then pursuing such weapons.

Earlier this month during a televised speech about Iraq, the president said, "Iran would benefit from the chaos and would be encouraged in its efforts.to gain nuclear weapons and dominate the region."

Brzezinski also disapproved of Bush's statement. "When the president flatly asserts they are seeking nuclear weapons, he's overstating the facts," he said. "We are suspicious, we have strong suspicions, but we don't have facts that they are."

Brzezinski, who served under President Jimmy Carter, said he is not sure how to interpret Iran's intentions. Iran has insisted its nuclear program is intended solely for peaceful purposes.

"I think it's quite possible that they are seeking weapons or positioning themselves to have them, but we have very scant evidence to support that," he said. "And the president of the United States, especially after Iraq, should be very careful about the veracity of his public assertions."

But Henry Kissinger, the former national security adviser and secretary of state under President Nixon, appeared not to doubt Iran's alleged ambitions."I believe they are building a capability to build a nuclear bomb," Kissinger told CNN. "I don't think they're yet in a position to build a nuclear bomb, but they may be two or three years away from it."

Brzezinski urged American officials to be patient, whatever Tehran's intentions may be. "If we escalate the tensions, if we succumb to hysteria, if we start making threats, we are likely to stampede ourselves into a war, which most reasonable people agree would be a disaster for us," he said.

"And just think what it would do for the United States, because it would be the United States which would be at war. We will be at war simultaneously in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. And we would be stuck for the next 20 years."

Kissinger said the international community should enlist support from countries opposed to Iran becoming a nuclear power.

"The current objective has to be to unite the countries that will suffer directly from Iranian nuclear weapons, the members of the Security Council and other countries in a program of diplomacy," he said.

Serious consideration should be given on chosing America's next President. Not only for Americans but for every citizen around the world.

A "Strong asset", MY ASSET!! Just how detached can one person be? These two words alone confirm my suspicions… He's definitely hitting the bottle again. Cheney probably puts a nipple on it for him when he tucks him in at night.
How anyone can STILL be supporting this airhead is beyond me. I guess if great minds think alike then the opposite must hold true as well. Oh, and one more thing Georgie boy, you may want to lay off of the whole "God talks to me" stuff. Most Americans who hear voices in their head get put on meds and sent to the nut hut.
The more I think about it, the Democrats should get Bush to campaign for THEM! He's the poster boy for why you shouldn't vote Republican.

Thanks for your comments Richard. Shame your vote won't count. Being from Florida and all.

From comments by Bush supporters we have learned: (1) A “hero” is someone who can’t find one person in the whole world who can attest that Bush served in Alabama, but has no problem when his supporters trash actual heroes like John McCain, John Kerry, Max Cleland, and John Murtha. (2) Bush is “moral” when he campaigned criticizing others morals then pardoned a 4-time felon from his administration. (3) Someone is not a hypocrite when they compare the political firings of 9 federal prosecutors to 93 Clinton firings and purposely skip admitting that Bush had fired 93 prosecutors also. (4) An example of a “courageous” leader is one who reads “The Pet Goat” while hundreds of Americans die in our own country. (5) Bush has kept us safe by leaving our borders open to Mexico and Canada, by fighting Democratic efforts to legislate more port security and fighting hard to turn port security over to an Arab company. (6) Bush is “honorable” for being “disgusted” about the Petraeus ad, but always refused to condemn the lies from the not-so-Swift Boat Veterans. (7)A “fair” person would generate the 5 largest national deficits in history and pass them to future generations to pay. (8) Bush is “honest” when he tells us he never said that he wasn’t concerned about bin Laden anymore, and when he told us Rumsfeld would stay, and when he insisted that “Iraq” was "never stay the course".

Everything above are facts. Let's use truth instead of blind wishes.

Sorry, posted on the wrong thread, it still holds true!

Folks, I think many are missing a major point on the UN. Ultimately at some point we will be sold out as a nation to them and be under their control. Many don't realize it but a former president of the United States had already done so.

Read on:
In May 1994, Clinton signed a Presidential Decision Directive, PDD 25, asserting his authority "to place U.S. forces under the operational control of a foreign commander" and under the United Nations rules of engagement. It is the most unconstitutional transfer of power in the history of America.(14)

Again, do a google search on "clinton gives control to the United Nations". We need a president that does indeed believe in the Constitution and it is very important they understand that control of our country should not be given to an organization such as the UN. President Clinton already tried and his act was rejected by the enforcement of the US Constitution. What do you suppose will be on the agenda if we let another Clinton into office? What do you suppose may happen if we let any candidate in that fully supports the UN?

Tell me, in all the positive things the UN has done, would any have occured without the US backbone and military power?

The US should not control the Earth nor should the UN. Remember the saying, absolute power corrupts absolutely. I believe you will see this occuring in short order if the UN is given control of the US.

I would be more apt to vote for ANY candidate that realizes the United States of America should always be its own entity and should never be controlled by any other organization other than the one our forefathers put together many years ago.

Any doubts to what I am talking about, do a search for PDD-25 on our official government search page: USASearch.gov

2B||!2B

Republicans: Voting for Ron Paul in the primaries is your only chance of getting a Republican president in 2008. Every other Repub running besides him is way too attached to Bush's failed polices to even have a chance to win.

At least I now know who elected this moron into office. These pro-Bush comments are insane!!! He's NOT a martyr, a leader, or a hero…WAKE UP PEOPLE!!! This is someone who I'm ashamed to be associated with as an American. He's not smart, courageous, or well-read. HE'S A MORON AND A LIAR!!! He stands for every bad quality that other countries now identify all Americans as having. He's not my president!!!

All the winning Democrat has to do is tie the 10 ton anchor of the Bush/Cheney administration to them and they won this election.

Bush is that bad for the Republicans right now being both untrustworthy and a huge failure.

In 15 years from now there may not even be a Republican party because of the damage Bush did.

Who's more divisive than President Bush? And by his own hand, not by others trying to paint him as such. As the Republicans have tried with Hillary.
My answer to the question of but you voted to give Bush the authority to invade Iraq, the reply: "I thought Bush was a competent Commander-in-Chief, he sure proved me wrong."

Run Forest Run Run……… Will Republican candidates in your opinion seek the endorsement of President Bush? —-> http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=576

.

Posters "Peg" and "Justin"

This presidency is a sham. Period.
The fact you both cannot see this in what is FACT, by the things George W. Bush has done to the United States, proves how uninformed you both truly are.

As far as "bashing bush," geez…What do you call all that went on during Clinton's administration? And when HE lied, no one DIED! He didn't start an UNJUST war, he didn't lose track of the real source of terrorists, he didn't use more signing statements than all previous Presidents combined, he didn't make our Democracy POLITICIZED (firing attorneys, making government the opposite of transparent to the American people, making facts fit his agenda IRAQ SCIENCE, borrow money from China to fund that UNjust war)

If you cannot see for the first time in American history, we are paying CIVILIAN MERCENARIES to fight our "war" (WHAT war?! There is no standing army..al qaida only makes up 1/3 of the insurgents..so WHO are they fighting!?)and for the first time, American troops aren't preparing their own food..we're paying another money grubbing American corporation to do it!

You people are so out of touch with reality, it truly disgusts me.

Most of you sound like a bunch of boring old buzzards sitting around a pickle barrel!

Why are there so many comments from Floridians? I mean it's not like you guys actually get to vote on the candidates is it?

I'm amazed anyone still supports Bush, let alone refers to him as a "great president." He has bankrupted us financially, and more importantly, morally. He has lied to us. I could forgive him for making mistakes, but lying to get us into Iraq was wrong. The Republicans ran on a moral superiority ticket in the last two elections, claiming that they supported family values, but when a bill came up to allow soldiers to spend time with their families THEY killed it. Shame!

Candidates "distancing" themselves from lame ducks is not unusual at all. Gore and Clinton were not buddies when Gore ran while Clinton was a lame duck. As I recall, there was a lot of talk about how those two were not/did not get along. Can't remember who ran when Johnson was a lame duck (was it McGovern?), but you can bet there was "distancing" there, too.

I want to know who is messing with the Bush supporters posts. They can't ALL be as ignorant with grammar and spelling as they appear can they? I swear, there ought to be a test before you're allowed to vote.

To DT in Wisconsin, there is one exception to your generalization…FDR was elected for three terms.

Wanting distance from the incumbant is nothing new. Gore didn't want Clinton's baggage following him around in 2000, and the GOP candidates feel the same way about Bush. After eight years, the general public gets a little fatigued by the incumbant- no matter who he is or what his approval rating is.

Posted By DT, Wisconsin : September 23, 2007 3:01 pm

Even Republican Presidential candidates refuse to stand with the leader of their own party.

So, what does that say about those far right supporters and their hero - you know, the leader of the free world?

Someone should remind them about the millions of refugees, dead and maimed human beings that Bush is personally reponsible for.

Yes, Bush is arguably the most detestable leader in the history of the free world. He is immoral and so are the crass lemmings that follow him.

Justin from Oklahoma…Are you dense???

This is not the dems bashing him (although they have all the reason in the world to do so)

This is the REPUBLICANS bashing him lol!

The fact that a person can sit here and say someone is no longer a candidate because of financial woes deserves to not speak at all.

The simple fact that money and financial assets determines who will be the frontrunners of our country is disgusting. I myself, will vote for Senator McCain, but sadly enough I am a poor college student who doesn't have the disposable income to send away.

Keep money out of politics and let the people decide.

sa as it was with the Democrats, rught after Clinton's scandals and impeachment. Bill Clinton was not welcome in democrats/Al Gore campaigns.
Remember?

Oh, come on guys. It's not like you haven't supported ALL of his policies. Republicans are the lowest forms of life on this planet.

It sounds like Bush is still living in a dream like he has been for the past 7 years….give it up already and go back to Crawford.

Quote: We must hang this failure of a president around the neck of every candidate on the Republican side. They have enabled him every step of the way including belittling Democrats and calling them traitors because they oppose the illegal occupation of Iraq.
They were happy to use Bush to their ends, now it is payback time.

Posted By elmerg colorado springs co

EXACTLY RIGHT - tie the republican '08 candidates to Bush every chance we get. Dig up every picture, quote, comment, appearance, whatever and let them twist in the wind with him. They enabled this pathetic president, now let them sink with him.

I think Bush can be an assett to some of the candidates who struggle to connect with the "bush loving Republicans" which still make up a good number of the party; all the good these candidates are distancing themselves from the party platofrm to which Bush won in 00 and 04 on….they will lose big in 08 if they dion't turn this into an advantage.

GOP Candidates to Bush: STAY AWAY…
This is just another CNN ruse…an article trying to deminish the stature of the Republican Party and President Bush….trying to create conflict. Best thing to do is 'IGNORE IT.' This is the same tactic that Iran creates.

I aint never red so many igorant thougts in my life. youse pepple think you are so klever. I hope you aint voters or we be in dang trubble.

Quite OBVIOUSLY…these BACK STABBING Republicans are NOT LEADERS, NOR are they our Republican Leaders of Tomorrow. This type of Republican won't get any support….although they 'think' they will. If these low life Republicans have some comment to make to President Bush, they would make it to his face. Otherwise, it's just hateful rhetoric. Each and everyone of these people mentioned in this article should be 100% in support of President Bush while he is in office. They all disgust me. President Bush will leave an incredible and positive legacy, one that will be the envy of the Democrats, to be sure. President Bush comprehends the world and history …both foreign to most candidtes of BOTH political persuasions.

George Bush is an honest fair man. He is also a good leader that has kept America out of harms way.

The world that criticizes Bush will miss him dearly when he is no longer the President as no other American President will spend so much energy and effort to fight terrorism all around the world.

Wait until the Europeans have to fight their own wars.

Bush is the 2-ton pink gorilla in the room. Wake up, Republicans.

Any Republican 'wanna-be' Presidential Nominee should be in complete support of the President. That among the potential candidates there is an aversion to his presence or influence dignifies that they are more in agreement with the Democrats. Any Republican candidate who does not align himself with President Bush and give him complete support..should jump into the Democratic Pool of potential nominees and become a Democrat. Any Republican who doesn't support President Bush…. doesn't deserve the Republican Presidential Nomination and will NOT get it. Wait and see. This vocal scourge against President Bush is NOT deserved and an off-shot of what Hateful Democrats have concocted. Only WEAK Republicans, and this obviously includes John McCain, have such an unfounded opinion. Good Riddance and Good Luck running for the nomination of the Democratic Party.

It is interesting to see that the only candidates that matter are the ones who the media have already determined are second tier. I am sure Ron Paul who is/was also on Mackinac Island is being as honest as candid as he always is when he wins the debates. I am sure he was doing what he always does, telling the truth and pointing out what should be obvious to all. Anyone who thinks Bush has made you safer, is the exact reason your democracy will not last much longer, for all intents and purposes it is almost gone already.

This article is nothing more than a response in retro to the fact that all the Democratic cannidates turned on Hilliary and CNN covered it, and Now they have to take things out of context,twist it into their liberal view and tell those ignorant enough to believe it that "Look the Republicans do it too". Hopefully we elect a Reublican president that has half the sack that president Bush has.

This goes on every election, political tactics on both sides of the fence to go after undecided voters. No one is really turning on each other on either side. Relax and dont let ANY media outlet including Fox News influence your overall decision on which cannidate or which party you choose to go with.

First error in the story: McCain is not top-tier.

800 pounds is pretty small for an elephant. Way to mix your metaphors.

Bush is a strong asset for the Democrats. Republicans had six years of controlling the white house and congress. They accompished almost nothing. Lets give the Democrats a chance. If they sit on their butts and fail to address the problems that are slowing getting worse, then maybe we will give Republicans another chance. And so on and so on. In the private sector if you dont do your job, you will be fired and replaced. Thats the way it SHOULD work in politics.

Well, a-holes, you campaigned for him and told us how much better he was than John Kerry. He's your mess.

I wouldn't trust you morons to be principal of a high school, let alone President of the United States.

Bush is unwelcomed in his own party and every other country in the world. 51 million people in America voted for him in the last election.This dismal conclusion was apparent a long time ago. What were those voters thinking?

Yeah, the candidates don't want to be attached to Bush's legacy, but how many have repudiated anything he has done? How many have challenged his policies in public? How many have told him to his face that he is damaging the party and the country?

Silence denotes assent. So while the candidates don't want anything to do with George Bush, they still tacitly agree with him.

The GOP presidential candiates are starting to look more and more like a herd of castrated elephants.

We must hang this failure of a president around the neck of every candidate on the Republican side. They have enabled him every step of the way including belittling Democrats and calling them traitors because they oppose the illegal occupation of Iraq.
They were happy to use Bush to their ends, now it is payback time.

Republicans fiddle while Rome burns — has anyone bothered to notice our country is disintegrating while they are busy defending the administration?

According to a resource, "Popular history often remembers Nero as a libertine and a tyrant; he is known as the emperor who "fiddled while Rome burned"[3] and an early persecutor of Christians."

Ironically, our president is a champion of Christians, yet also has been a persecutor of his opponents.

What is wrong with this country? How we
attack our President, that we put into office! How can people say he's the worst President? Bush stands up for what he believes in. He has been faced
with very difficult decisions. World
Trade Center for instance: we all
wanted to handle the terrorists so did
Bush. So we went to war..Now it's not going our way so we want to pull out?
Our you ready for blood shed on our soil? President Bush has kept us safe
since 9-11. We complain how our rights
our taken away. There not, that's
how where protected! If you have something to hide you need to be investigated! If you don't ,then no worry's! Correct! Congress makes choices also. President Bush argues
with them for our rights! I notice alot
of people judge him. Could they be president? They expect Bush to be in
ten places at once. Bush is not God
he's human just like the rest of us.
President Bush thankyou for protecting
us and doing your best to run this country. I'm scared of the next President. I hope he's half the man
as President Bush is! If he or she doesn't have Bushs beliefs I'm not
voting for them. For our President is honorable man that should be respected.

The republicans are going to fall into the same trap as Al Gore did in 2000. He failed to use a sitting President that was unpopular at the time and it cost him the election. Bush not only won the last election, but he won decisively. The republicans should welcome him as an asset and have him stand by their side, even if they don't agree with all of his ideas or Iraq.

Typical Republicans, still more opt to blame the other party than to take responsibility. Bush messed up on Iraq by invading with false reasons. Then openly disgraces our country by allowing torture, losing all credibility in the world. The GOP candidates should applaud him "Heck of a job Bushie!"

Democrats are still obsessed with bashing Bush, even in the 2008 election…and their minions in the media are climbing over each other to give them a voice. Guess what? Like Bush or not, he is done. He is not on the '08 ballot.

I don't agree with all of Bush's policies, but jeeze, quit bashing the guy. Disagree with him on issues, but don't hate him. There is so much hate out there for him. Those of you who hate Bush should look in the mirror and ask yourselves how you were so dumb to let him get elected TWICE.

There is no question that Bush will go down in history as the worse president in U.S. history. He will not be vindicated.
a thousand years will not blur the damage he has done. He is not Truman …Not even close.
I understand that the Republican candidates must acknowledge him but I think the majority realize that he is a disaster of the first magnitude.
The fact that he thinks that he is a "strong asset" should give you the first clue.
The sooner we get rid of the mad hatter the better.

George W. Bush's presidency will be judged in future history as one of the best in recent years. Because of the constant mainstream media attacks now, he can't be viewed as such currently. Abraham Lincoln wasn't exactly popular in the 1860's. I understand the reason current GOP candidates have to distant themselves from Bush although it is sad to see such a moral, courageous man cast aside. Bill Clinton was a pariah in the '94 elections and Al Gore distanced himself from BC in 2000. Democrats lost in both elections, so sometimes the attempt at distance doesn't work.

>Republican presidential candidates can't be any more clear: President Bush isn't welcome on the campaign trail.

Does it bother anyone else when a news article sets up an absolute, literal statement, and then makes an inferential one instead?

In this case, the Republican candidates could be more clear. They could literally say, "President Bush is not welcome on the campaign trail." But they haven't. Come on, AP.

How do you get a Republican presidential candidate to appear with Bush? Photoshop.

Bush will always be rated on the conflict in Iraq. Well, once a government method proven successful in Iraq the security of trade exchanged with Iraq and the surrounding region will embolden both Nations. With the ever pending conflict between Sunni and Shia states Iran’s nuclear agenda might have had a reason for gaining weapons of Mass destruction as Saddam required the retaliatory style weapons. The entire world will eventually benefit from the arrest of Saddam; sure, it would have been better for Alexander the great to have passed his troops through Persia in small groups venturing to Persia’s eastern frontier; his soldiers dropping gold to merchants along the way, wedding their daughters and upon formation protecting Persia’s serfs from far eastern brigands; but, that is only taken in hind sight as a better option.

A government method which includes both Sunni and Shiite in appropriate conjunction is required and would prevent further excuses for religious confrontation.

When a Nation is proud and always ready with forces for war; it bends options and outcomes to conflict and battle glory.

Wanting distance from the incumbant is nothing new. Gore didn't want Clinton's baggage following him around in 2000, and the GOP candidates feel the same way about Bush. After eight years, the general public gets a little fatigued by the incumbant- no matter who he is or what his approval rating is.

Bush a "strong asset." We're "winning the war on terror." Iraq is "progressing." What next, "cars run on water"? "Cheney runs marathon"? I'm sorry, but I don't believe anyone who is in anyway aligned with or supportive of the republican party.

Strong asset!

Typical disconnect with what the voices of democracy have been screaming for quite some time.

Sinclair Lewis said it, " when fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross. "

Detachment from reality and chronic denial are key traits of George Bush; his amazing assertion that he is an asset to the Republican party simply re-confirms this. How sad that someone of this caliber has been at the helm of America for over 6 years now….no wonder we are profoundly off course.

The fact that CNN's rookie writers still cite McCain as a contender is hilarious. He's done. He's terribly in debt and even a second-tier candidate like Ron Paul has more cash on hand than he does. Oh well, I understand CNN's choice to relegate the rookie writers to the blog.

YEAH, SURE. THEY DON'T WANT HIM AROUND WHILE THEY ARE ON THE ELECTION TOUR, BUT THEY VOTE IN LOCK STEP WITH HIM IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE. AND BUSH SAYING HE IS A STRONG ASSET THE REPUBLICANS DON'T SEEM TO FIGURE OUT THAT THIS DUMBO IS INSANE.

George W. Bush has very few redeeming qualities as a politician. He is the typical American, embracing a worldview that this planet is painted in blacks and whites. This approach has eviscerated the nation's fragile undercarriage and left us at each others' throats. His presidency was one of the worst in this nation's history, all things considered, so it is no wonder candidates are trying to distance themselves from his administration.

A typical Bush moment.
ME ME ME
The man has no class. He can't even step aside for the good of his Party or Candidates!

I can't imagine how he'd perceive himself as an Asset to anyone, given his long list of Liabilities shadowing his Leadership!

Well at least some Republicans have enough common sense to keep a distance from George. Then again, there is his Republican fan club (and we all know who you are) that still "wuv" their president and sincerely believe he is a clever guy.

I think George Bush is a hero and a martyr and anyone should be happy to be associated with a brave, honest, "green" man who is not a hypocrite as all the others are both sides are.

Asked last week whether he is an asset or a liability for Republican candidates, Bush replied: "Strong asset."

There is no one so blind as one who cannot see.

And has not seen for two terms in the White House . . .

Might the President solve the problem then?

Parties belong in a democratic communist government method; applied for electing an entire administration to leadership, which would then after the election appoint riding representatives from the party platform representing the people.

In the Capitalist United States the president is like a president of a giant corporation; a person hired for employment, the congress is a venue of control like a incorporates executive stock holders with the Speaker of the House its CEO, the Senators are the Corporations Board of Senior Managers, the Secretary of State is like a Chief Internal Auditor, while the States are the companies under incorporated control each with its own management.
The congressional parties should only exist to raise awareness and gain representation by the party method for a proposed ‘amendment to be’; the senate should not have parties at all, and the presidential parties are created for electing to the presidency one single individual person with the party as his campaign staff. The Democratic party attempts to gain one vote for every individual ‘one person, one vote’ similar to the British system, the Republicans protect the aristocratic informed legislative assembly electoral method, while the Congressional Union for female Suffrage puts forward such an amendment, (and also)… What of the equal rights movement and the Party for Equal rights ‘Jena’? Outside the party topic of their chosen represented amendment: members of Congress all need to return to a non-biased federalist state.

In the Parliamentary system the Premiers, the Speakers of the Houses, and the Prime Minister position itself are elected in the first or second session by the sitting Ministers; but, when voting for Ministers: the public should be limited to choose from parties restricted to the electorate riding of representation, like a riding specific farmers party; the public can not elect ministers based on the promise of a vote for a house leader. The Leader of the Opposition is provided for handling points of topic opposition when in Question Period as a route for providing points for the opposing members of a topic preventing and protecting ministers from holding a bias between each other in future topic discussions.

Bush unwelcome?
Republicans are acting like Iraqis.
Ingrates!