For The 2nd Day In A Row, Bush Administration Adopts Obama's Policies

It's just amazing how hypocritical both John McCain and the Bush Administration are.

Just last month Barack was the great appeaser. Now they are doing exactly what Barack called for.

This only goes to show that Barack Obama was right. He's more educated than both Bush and McCain and is able to put together realistic plans for moving forward.

This is part of the "Change" that Barack Obama speaks of.

I am more confident that he is the best person for the job. It appears that all that experience both John McCain and George Bush speak of amounts to nothing.

I'm glad you appreciate the observation.

Lloyd

Obama is more educated than Bush or McCain. I find it funny when some of the big words he uses are used by Republicans for painting Obama as an elitist. I want my President to speak well. You can not graduate from Harvard Law School and come out speaking like a "good old boy" if you are being true to yourself. I think more voters need to stay up on politics so more would see McCain and Bush taking on Obama ideas.

We will have to watch this all play out,I believe the United States leadership said they will not meet with the leader of Iran with our conditions set on the table.
President Bush is not meeting with the leader of Iran,like he dose with other leaders all around the world,he is sending a very wise educated man that understands very well foreign policy.
If you watched Fox News tonight you would had seen both sides of this issue,John McCain spoke on this visit in detail.
I trust the present leadership they have keep the American people safe since the attack on New York City some years back.
It is a very big unmeasurable job that details many departments and personal,I have no complaints against my government they have done a super job making sure the American people have stayed safe.
I'm very thrilled George W.Bush signed the order to begin drilling for oil.
Most Americans are weary of sending 700 billion dollars every year to the middle east for foreign oil.
Looking back in time had president Bill Clinton signed the order we would not be in the terrible mess we are in today.
Instead of signing the order,Bill Clinlton said first before drilling for oil all the refinery in the U.S.had to be borough up to standards and code,the idea of drilling for oil was scrubbed,that was a terrible mistake.
Bill Clinton was not in favor of drilling for oil and I think his party takes that same stand as we speak.
Barack Obama told his people no drilling,he prefers we use our food chain for energy,this concerns me we don't want to next be begging other nations for feed for our farm animals and food for our tables.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton told the whole world we American's was sitting around our kitchen tables trying to figure out how we was going to pay our house payment,get the kiddies to day day care,get back and forth to work and still eat.
Thank goodness George W. Bush heard out cry for help and signed the order to let the drilling begin.
Seems the middle east got Bush's memo today the price for a barrel of oil went down,fist time it has went down this much in one day is 17-18 years.
The United States can't wait no longer to begin drilling,700 billions dollars year is paid to the middle east for our oil,waiting for nuclear power will only serve to keep us even longer depended on foreign oil.
Oh think about it,I really can not begin to think George W. Bush is looking to Barack Obama for foreign policy advise,reason being Obama has so very little experience in such matters.
To me it would be like having a brain tumor and making an appointment with a baker,just don't make much common sense to me.

For those of us who want real change from a man with a brain and an agenda other than making money for oil companies Obama makes sence. Oil drilling in the U.S will not do a thing for gas prices for 5-10 years. The recent decline will probably be made up for in two or three days. This is just another excuse to keep us dependent on oil. There are other ways the government can help those who need it and boost the economy. Increase child tax credit, money for college, paid maternity leaves, mandatory paid vacations. All of these are standard in Europe where surveys consistently say people are happier with their lives. These would also boost the economy, put money in peoples pockets and we could quit wasting money subsidizing oil drilling companies. In 5-10 years there are several alternative energy cars that could vitually take over the market. Bush is for the filthy rich. Oil prices started rising at record rates while he is in office. Him and Cheney are getting more rich off this whole thing.

Sending a wise educated man that understands very well foreign policy is the same as President Bush being there. He is doing nothing less than relaying Bush's message.

Bush said that that the United States would not negotiate with terrorist nations, especially the one he labeled as the "Axis Of Evil".

You now must admit that Barack Obama was correct.

Lloyd

Barack Obama's approach to the problems in the Middle East is well thought out. The Bush Administration approach of "Cowboy Diplomacy" has been failure.

Now you see the Republicans using Barack's strategies in dealing with some of the problems we face throughout the world.

I'm glad they are finally coming around and getting on board.

Lloyd

I think you are giving President Bush too much credit. He realizes that the America people do not want to be involved in another war and now is looking for a way to get out of the box he has put himself in.

I think Obama has to get some of the credit because the majority of the American people support his postion over Bush's and the Bush Administration has to listen to the will of the people.

Why is Bush now negotiating when he earlier said he would never negoitiate with a terrorist nation, epecially on he called the "Axis Of Evil"?

Lloyd

In 2004, the same year Barack Obama was elected to the senate(hence his claim that he had never voted for war in Iraq-he never could have as he never had the opportunity!) That year president Bush had rejected the idea of war with Iran because the USA had only recently begun the diplomatic process with that country.
Four years later, it is only natural the war retoric has become more heated because diplomatic efforts have failed to achieve the desired end. And let me
add....the Bush-unfreindly news media has not been ready to report on the diplomatic efforts of the USA with Iran, that is, until they could claim President
Bush was "stealing" Barack Obama's idea. Of course the intent of the leftist media is to promote more Bush-Bashing in the light of the coming presidential election.
All this, when in fact the Bush administration has been involved in the diplomatic
process with Iran for four years now. I think we also know that the leadership of Iran realizes where the Bush administration stands on issues of diplomacy with them and, as such his diplomats would never meet with the dangerous leaders of that country "without precondition" as in his naivete Obama has suggested the USA would do under his leadership. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5874792/

Why then did Bush and McCain repeatedly say that we should not negotiate or talk with countries such as Iran who support terrorists? Magically, after Obama talks about sitting down with Iran he sends a convoy. This can not be denied. I seriously think Bush would rather go to war he just has his highest ranking miltary man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff get up in the white house and say it would put a great stress on U.S. troops. If Bush had the support and capability he would try to take over the world to gain control of all the oil. Of course he would screw that up worse than Hitler.

Repeating, their tough retoric didn't work so they went back to the origingal plan to negotiate before sending in the troops. It only makes sense to do that first.

When was the last time Bush negotiated with Iran? I am not sure how many years it has been since a U.S. president has talked to Iran. I guess I'm not understanding how negotiating was Bush's original plan, maybe because it was not. In my opinion there is some other flawed logic here. How do you start negotiations by bullying with "tough rhetoric". Sounds like a recipe for a dysfunctional relationship.

Our focus should have never been taken off of Pakistan and Afghanistan. It's where all the planning for the terrorist attacks originated.

How we ever ended up in Iraq, I'll never know.

Lloyd

I agree with you. They must be wondering what is fueling this movement.

It's only logical for them to steal some of Barack Obama's postions.

I just don't think Iran will fall for it. I don't think they trust President Bush.

Lloyd

i dont trust him myself but then i wary about any politian

I think they've decided to talk to the Iranians because the majority of Americans agree with Barack Obama's ideas when it comes to dealing with our adversaries.

"Cowboy diplomacy" just doesn't work when it comes to rogue nations. Hopefully the Bush Administration will tone down some of its rhetoric and move towards negoatiating with the Iranian leadership.

Fox News should ashamed of calling themselves "Fair and Balanced". I don't think most Americans really take them seriously.

George Bush has governed in step with the Neocons over at Fox for the last 7 years and look at the mess we are in.

Llo0yd

Taskr, as usual you have put my thoughts into print perfectly. President Bush is going to be dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't achieve the goals he has set out to achieve. Today he is talking about having diologue with the leaders in Iraq about pulling out. Instead of admitting the troop surge he fought Congress for has worked and brought enough stability to the country to begin looking at pullingsome of the troops out, his opposition is going to say he took Obama's adviceand started the troop withdrawal. Never mind it is the goal he has been working toward all along! What a vicious circle!

Here is a link that chronicles the US plans and progress in Iraq in recent months. No one can deny they had a plan for success in the region and have been working toward it all along. http://www.uspolicy.be/issues/iraq/iraq.asp

There may have been a plan for Iraq. The problem is I don't agree with the reasons for the war to begin with and the notion that it is making us safer. Bush can be defended it makes no difference. He will be gone in November and Obama will be president. Then the few who defend Bush can reverse rolls and degrade everything Obama does.

George Bush had to come to grips with the fact that his strategy is a failure. He saw the overwhelming support that Barack's plan has from the American people and decided to act on it.

This is no coincidence.

Lloyd

"The problem is I don't agree with the reasons for the war to begin with and the notion that it is making us safer."

The fact that you disagree with the war in Iraq changes nothing. I disagreed with the war in Iraq, but it happened anyway. Now we have to deal with it. Dealing with it doesn't mean bringing everyone home tomorrow. It means stabilizing the region and gradually letting the Iraqis take over the security of their own country. That's the way every major war has been handled in the past.

Lloyd, now that Iran has shown they have no intention of changing their plans and the diplomatic route has failed, are you going to blame Bush, or acknowledge that "Obama's plan" turned out to be a failure as McCain said it would be? Fortunately the US stuck to its guns and did not appease Iran. Frankly I don't care if you blame Bush or not because despite the Democrats best efforts, I'm pretty sure most people are intelligent enough to realize that Bush is NOT running for the presidency this time. Democrats just keep bringing him up in the hopes that uneducated voters will believe he and McCain are the same person.

I believe that the Iranians are waiting for new leadership here in the United States.

They know the true feelings of the Bush Administration towards them and don't believe he has sincerely changed his feelings towards them overnight.

Let everything play out. I believe that the next administration will be able to better negotiate with the Iranian leadership.

Lastly, you cannot call Bush's efforts at negotiating, "Obama's plan". I don't know what was said by Bush's senior diplomat, but I'm sure it was much of the same "Cowboy Diplomacy".

Lloyd

Of course I knew you'd continue to call it Bush's fault. That's just too easy. As for Iran waiting for a new leader, you're probably right. They are likely hoping that Obama will win and that he will be the appeaser they've been waiting for. Someone who will bend over and let their nuclear plan develop without sanctions or consequences. Fortunately even the UN isn't backing down with regards to Iran's uranium enrichment.

He is a brief outline of Obama's plan for dealing with Iran.

Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.

Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations.

If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.

I'm sorry that he hasn't made bombing Iran his first priority. Let's give his plan a try before going to war with Iran.

Lloyd

I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it all turns out. I just don't like the idea of discussing incentives until a country has already shown a genuine interest in ceasing the activities that have put the rest of the world at such unease.

On a side note I just want to say that as with Anniepa, I really enjoy such discussions with you. I appreciate that although we disagree constantly, you are always professional and stick to the issues. It's too bad there are still some people that resort to personal attacks rather than a civilized discussion.

Clrumfelt: The reason I stated I did not agree with the war and that it was making us safer is because of the link you provided us with. The link is interesting but it seems the main objective of the piece is to explain to all of us how great the invasion of Iraq is and how it will make us safer. I respect everyone's opinion and think it is great that at least some of us are attempting to know the issues before we vote no matter if we vote the same.

McCain was NEVER expected to easily defeat Obama. After Bush's terrible approval ratings the odds on a Republican winning were so low it was ridiculous. From the start this election has been the Democrat's to lose. Had Obama and Clinton not battled so fiercely and hit so low, McCain wouldn't have had a chance. As it is, Obama's had enough racist and anti-American associates to bring him down a notch.

I agree that before the Obama/Clinton "to-do", it was assumed that no Republican could win, especially not someone who espoused Bush policy. McCain in particular was despised in Republican circles - the mantle initially was assumed to be Rudy's, then Romney's (thank God that fell through). Hillary was the heir-apparent, no one viable was expected to challenge her. Obama proved to be the fly in the ointment, but a fly with amazing oratory skills and the ability to not give tit for tat when the attacks against him began to fly. I don't believe THEY fought so much as SHE fought HIM. She resented that he was able to do what she didn't think possible. She and Bill believed (and probably still do) that all support was due to her and her alone, that she "deserved" this and anyone who didn't support her was a traitor (see Bill's reaction to Bill Richardson's endorsement of Obama). Personally, I think she b!tched herself out of the position. But, because we still have so much bigotry in this country and because it was (and is) assumed that Hillary would do more to undermine Obama than support him, plus the unfortunate timing of his pastor's vicious and angry words, it was newly assumed that McCain would likely win, that white would trump black, regardless that it shouldn't even have a part in it. However, with McCain's faltering responses and not having answers to questions given to him and the question of his age, the possibility of Obama's winning became more pronounced. As even some Republicans began to voice support for Obama, the Bush side had to do something. They had to draw attention away from Obama's rising star to their own falling one. I do think that's what's behind most of this. I fully believe it is a calculated way to keep Obama's ideas from being unique - kind of like overhearing a co-worker share an idea before going to the meeting and then YOU presenting it as your own, but on a bigger stage.

I know they admire Barack Obama. He has be right on all these issues.

Isn't funny how a little common sense can trump all of the Neocon's experience.

It's called Barack's "thoughtful" approach to diplomacy. I'm glad to see that Bush is finally seeing the light.

Lloyd

I don't think Bush could see the light if you handed him a candle. I think the only reason they're doing it is to take steam out of Obama's campaign, which they KNOW is effective.

I agree with you. If they would have done this 5 years ago, we wouldn't be speaking of going to war with another Middle Eastern country.

Countries will always resist being bullied with idle threats.

Lloyd

I believe they know that the real threat lies on the Afganistan/Pakistan boarder. But there's something about Iraq that irks them.

Could it be that Iraq has vast amounts of oil?

Could it be that Iraq was the easier target to conquer after it was softened during Gulf War I?

Could it be that Saddam Hussein once attempted to assasinate former President George Bush?

Who knows why the Neocons are so obsessed with Iraq. All I know is that spending 12 billion dollars a week there is insane. And the cost in American lives is criminal.

Hopefully Barack Obama will bring an end to this madness. We need his thoughtful approach at this time.

Lloyd