Damn, that is such a tough one from which to choose. You got me!

Most everything you have written is just wrong and not proven by indepedent sources, intentionally misleading and not germain to the bush invasion of Iraq.

Take off the bushworld rose colored glasses and get in the real world.

If people learned more of their lessons as children, they’d be far less problematic as adults.

All you ever seem to do is call people liars, if the facts do not fit your “Weltanschauung.”

Kevin — I was unaware that the French, German, Russian, and English intel agencies were loyal to Bush. The U.N. also said there were WMD. HUSSEIN said he had them. (Why else would he kick out the U.N. inspectors? Why did his elite troops have chem suits?) You may also recall back in the ’80s he launched a satellite, indicating ability to launch an ICBM, or at least an MRBM. He was, perhaps, not as close to getting a nuke as we thought, but we could not wait six months to find out. Summer was coming, and operating in MOP gear is not feasible in 120-degree weather.

In any event, Hussein had attacked Kuwait, and was not abiding by the terms of the cease-fire. As such, the invasion was legitimate based on the resumption of hostilities that Hussein initiated.

Old and decayed weapons from the 80′s do not count and where is the DEFINITIVE proof that the others were trucked into Syria. You would think with all of satellite imagery we have and the concentration of resources on Iraq, we would have picked it up. Don’t you think?

“Hussein did have the ability to go after Israel. Only the fact that Israel would have destroyed him kept him from doing it.”

So why were we worried about it then if Israel could defend itself? So what if he made threats if he couldn’t carry them out? And to the U.S., please. Hussein knew that we would wipe the floor with him. Why would he try to arouse our anger? He was posturing for the Middle East. Anybody who doesn’t understand that, would fail any international relations class.

“Hussein WAS trying to get nuclear weapons. It was WILSON who doctored his report.”

Wrong again. Where do you get your sources? Newsmax? Redstate? Find me a mainstream article saying that Wilson doctored the report. Thank you.

“Congress had access to EXACTLY the same intel that Bush did.”

That was collected by people and agencies loyal to Bush and his administration. So it’s no wonder that Congress would vote for war.

I’ll take a Colin Powell quote here to sum up.

“After telling the UN assembly in 2003 that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, the former Secretary of State admitted in May 2004 the claims were “inaccurate and wrong and, in some cases, deliberately misleading”

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/article2042969.ece

There are enough problems facing this country that require difficult and honest conversations. The very last thing we need to saddle them with dishonest participants who like nothing more than making a big mess out of nothing. If those that don’t like being shut out want to participate? There is a very easy solution – stop lying, and realize that the world is not made to serve you and yours alone. If you can somehow show that, in a genuine way, I’m sure you will be welcomed back into the conversation, and I don’t doubt that you can one day usefully contribute to it.

It’s the first rule children learn when going to birthday parties.

“Don’t throw cake and be sure to thank your host/hostess.”

I guess Mr. Webb, and apparently a whole bunch of y’all never learned that lesson.

Hussein did have the ability to go after Israel. Only the fact that Israel would have destroyed him kept him from doing it.

Hussein WAS trying to get nuclear weapons. It was WILSON who doctored his report.

Congress had access to EXACTLY the same intel that Bush did.

Unless I don’t get the same news, there were no WMDs found.

“WHO threatened the U.S. and Israel?”

Who hasn’t threatened the US and Israel at some point? Hussein didn’t have the capability to go after Israel or he would have done it before the invasion.

“WHO was trying to get nuclear weapons? Hussein”

Not at the time of the invasion and some of the evidence gathered was doctored.

“Who voted to go to war with Iraq? Congress.”

Yeah, you’re right Bush and his advisors had no hand in showing evidence that was at best faulty to prop up their war drive.

(if no one else)

In other words, there was no threat, and CR just made it up in an effort to score some imaginary political point.

And people are expected to engage crap like this with respect and civility? The sooner that those that create and inhabit this imaginary world are no longer part of the political conversation, the sooner we’ll be able to have a productive conversation about how to work our way out of this mess.

I know some of you might not see this as a threat, but to even suggest laying a hand on the President, whether George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, or any other, is something that most Secret Service agents (if no one else) would find rather troublesome.

If it wasn’t for your snarkiness over my opinion (calling me stupid and dishonest) I’d almost (I said almost) agree with some of the lefitst interpretation of this event.

Really, Ward? It was *my* snarkiness that kept you from almost agreeing? Then let me revise – stupid and/or dishonest.

I think everyone else has pretty much taken down your points, with ease.

~

And as to Mr. Shugart, if he really believed that Clinton was responsible for the death of his son, I don’t think him wrong or blame him for a moment.

Unfortunately, we don’t get to make up the protocol rules. Whether you agree with them or not, and whether you think he was justified or not, Webb displayed a disregard for manners and for protocol.

That said, this could be an endless circle. We’re not going to agree. Those who have said this falls pretty much along partisan lines are right. And we’ve all got better things to discuss.

As for Mr. Shugart, I’m fuzzy on the details of that incident. But if it was during the ceremony for the presentation of the medal, I think he was wrong too.

Ward, I think there’s something wrong with the protocol. An American president isn’t royalty (thankfully). It’s just as conceivable to me that GWB would ask the same set of inappropriate questions to the Senator-Elect in the receiving line. Perhaps the Senator-Elect avoided GWB, because he knew by reputation that GWB would inadvertently say something either incredible mindless, or simply flat out offensive.

Maybe the Senator-Elect was concerned that GWB would talk with food in his mouth, or that GWB would give his wife a back rub. I don’t know.

Obivously a person’s attitude towards the president is going to color their perception of the exchange.

Incidentally, in 1994 another military father Hubert Shugart, refused to shake Bill Clinton’s hand when his son, Gary, was award a posthumous Congressional Medal of Honor for his service in Somalia. My view of that incident is similar to this one. As a president, when you send a parent’s child into war, you better expect that you are going to get some strong emotional reactions from parents. This just comes with the terrority. All things considered, I think that the Senator Elect exercised tremendous restraint.

The only person who was boorish and confrontational was Bush.
The President had been briefed to be sensitive to the fact that Lance Corporal Jimmy Webb very recently escaped death in the hostile Anbar province in Iraq. (Unfortunately, three other young Marines died next to Corporal Webb.) Senator Elect Webb made the choice to not have his picture taken with President Bush; it was Bush who searched out Webb. If you grant that the President’s clumsy (I find “your boy” objectionable) phrasing of “How’s your boy” was sincere, you must also grant that the polite “I’d like to get them out of Iraq, Mr. President” was equally sincere. With full knowledge of Webb’s concern for the life of his son, Bush confronted Webb and impertinently shot back “That’s not what I asked. How’s your boy?” This lack of empathy and tact demeaned only one person, President Bush, and one office, that of the Presidency. If the President’s only parental concern is having his own Secret Service-protected children thrown out of Argentina for bad behavior, Bush’s lack of understanding of the feelings of the father of a combat Marine is understandable. It may not be forgivable.

Webb’s reply, “That is between me and my boy, Mr. President,” was far more “Virginia Gentlemanly” an answer than this ill-mannered, fake Texas cowboy deserved, and I commend our next great Senator for his self-control.

I spent 8 years in DC planning meetings and conventions. There are literally hundreds of locations in Washington to hold non-hosted “mixers.”

No, the White House doesn’t belong to George Bush. But he is the elected representative of the people to live there and host there.

Protocol dictates that the guests should go through the receiving line. It futher dictates that conversation in the receiving line be very limited. Again, if Webb had followed the protocol, it is likely that this exchange would never have taken place.

I disagree with #1. My read is that Webb went to the event with the express purpose of meeting his new colleagues in congress in a non-work related environment. This reception reminds me of a typical mixer that you might find at a university sponsored event for incoming college freshmen.

Unlike your typical meet and greet party the food was paid for by tax-payers, the House did not actually belong to the Host (but was on temporary loan), and the Senator-Elect was not invited because he and the Host enjoyed a long-standing personal relationship, or even an employer-employee relationship. The usual “guest-host” analogies that we think of, simply fall apart when applied to Federal Washington, DC.

I’m also curious to know: When did receiving lines become part of the American political tradition? I can understand these at weddings, funerals, debutante balls, and meet and greets with royalty, but I have a sneaking suspicion that our Founding Fathers would have looked on this tradition skeptically.

The moment you said Kos, it has no unbias creadiblity.

And lets not get into an argument of who is an ass-hole between ANYONE and Webb. He prides himself on it, and you people nominated him becuase of it.

And NLS, we get it, you said it first. “Hoo-hoo, tell ‘em Fred, I’ve done it all” You sound like Howard Stern, NLS… Get over yourself.

Two people can report the same info. You don’t get to squat info in the Blogosphere just becasue you read it and reported it “first.”

First I’ve never thought Webb was “really a conservative” and I’ve always thought he was a hothead.

If it wasn’t for your snarkiness over my opinion (calling me stupid and dishonest) I’d almost (I said almost) agree with some of the lefitst interpretation of this event.

But nothing can change the fact that 1) Webb WENT to the White House with an attitude, 2) Webb WENT to the White House and purposefully avoided the host (yes, I know it’s the people’s White House, but as long as GWB is the President he is also the host), and 3) that there was nothing wrong with the initial question.

In fact the initial question was quite kind and caring.

Could both men have handled it differently? Probably.

But what is really stupid and dishonest in this is implying that Webb had no responsibility for the tone of the exchange or that he was the one wronged.

So, wipe that cool whip off your face, dry your eyes, wipe your nose and being such a whimp.

GWB is a man not a god. And he is a man who – afterall – works for the people.

If anyone should be lectured on how to behave I would start with f^&k you Cheney and then we can discuss suggesting poisoning a sitting Supreme Court justice, blowing up Coit Tower in San Francisco and see just who has the “bad manners” market cornered.

So dry those crocodile tears and get on with destroying the country – time’s a wastin’!

Is that the state of the VA blogsphere? If it is, then that’s sad, really sad.

Since none of us were there, we must put into it the tone we attribute to Bush. Bush haters will put on it a bad tone; Bush supporters will put on it a good tone. We all know that MB is a hater.

But if you need more detail (and I’m beginning to see that you may):

1) It’s dishonest in that it skips the key point – the rude part wasn’t in asking how his son was, it’s was the “That’s not what I asked.” Any person who isn’t carrying partisan water who reads the whole exchange is pretty clear on who the asshole is. It’s funny, though, how that bit keeps getting dropped in Republican discussion of it. Perhaps you’re all thinking that if George Will can do it, so can you. Go ahead. It makes you all dishonest, then. Shocker.

2) The stupidity of it comes in expecting anyone besides your own kool-aid drinking crowd to not see it as exactly what it is – dishonest and desperate spin. Really, you just look silly, being so obsessed with Webb before he’s cast a single vote. First he’s really a conservative, and then he’s a hothead, and next . . . well, I’m sure you’ll come up with something. But don’t expect people to refrain from laughing at you. Which is exactly what you deserve, thus far.

~

As to my credibility to speak on Republicans? Heh, it’s only based on what I see and hear. But I’d venture to guess that it’s a fair sight better than your credibility to speak on Democrats.

Also, what gives you credibility to talk about the GOP? Are you in the party? Do you know what Republicans are thinking? When was the last city committee you attended?

Yea, thought so.

Where was the mocking, where was the rudeness in asking “How’s your boy?” It was nothing more than the President’s folksy way of expressing his legitimate concern.

But the problem was that Webb walked in there with an attitude. He admits to avoiding the receiving line. I think I know you well enough that you understand what manners are. When you’re invited to a party you ALWAYS thank the host.

This never would have happened if Webb had minded his manners. He could have sucked it up like an adult instead of a spoiled hot-head brat and could have gone through the receiving line.

Then, when asked “How’s your boy?” He could have politely said, “He’s fine Mr. President. It was a close call. But I’d like to see him and all our boys come home.”

If Webb had done that, we would never have heard anything about this.

I haven’t spent much time on this blog talking about Bush – no need to, really. The rest of the blogsphere does a pretty good job of it.

(Oh, and Jim, I don’t think for a second the GOP actually has enough collective sense to not nominate another W. While neither of them are W-replicas, look at your most popular presumptive nominees right now – McCain, fresh off of one of the most craven political transformations I’ve ever seen, and Rudy “small man looking for a large balcony” Guiliani. Oh, yeah, the GOP has really learned its lesson.)

He lies, lies lies…He promised to unite the country and has created a divisiveness throughout the country and in Congress that is unprecedented.

He “lied” us into war and he has the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocent people on his hands….

Sorry but when I look at the heinous war crimes committed by George W. Bush I cannot see how “anyone” can respect this man.

Buzz…Buzz…

Cr UVA – Like MB said, where was the threat?

Jerry – See JPTERP’s answer.

GWB’s first question may have been within bounds. But his follow-up was completely off-base.

Is there anyone in identical circumstances that WOULDN’T ask how his son was?

You people get so wrapped up in your animosities …

It’s time to stop making things up, CR. Or didn’t you get the memo?