That is true, but is it really going to benefit anybody? Tit-for-tat-for-tit-for-tat goes on forever and doesn't solve anything. Do you want revenge or repair? Ask the Israelis and Palestinians - they have plenty of one but none of the other.

Which mistakes are you referring to? Seems to me everyone is screaming about how awful the Bush Administration is - rightly so - so I don't see the silence you're talking about.

Then how come Obama is doing well? Can the Republicans paint him as weak for talking about fixing things instead of pointing fingers and saying "nyah nyah, it's our turn to blame you, you'll have to wait to be back in power to do the same to us, and then we'll get back in power and do the same back again, ad infinitum, nyah nyah."

Unity? Have you seen what's happening with this McCain thing? If you're talking about how Republican representatives have followed lock step behind Bush into freedom infringement territory, I'd remind you that we don't want that kind of unity. It's the unity of scare tactics.

The only way to fix dirty playing is to take the high road, GC. Period. Call them out, make them look bad, and be able to stand on a clean history.

Already have the full bottle fo perscription sleeping pills ready to go.

The line between "reporting" and "editorializing" is often blurred.

I would rather have a president who is a strong leader yet a poor speaker than a president who gives great speeches but doesn't actually accomplish anything.

Not saying that Bush is a great leader (or that Obama won't be one one), just making a point.

Makes sense in theory. However, have we had any great presidents who were not also known for their public speaking ability? Could Moses get elected president?

I didn't throw out the option of Great President/Great Speaker (nor poor president/poor speaker). I was merely comparing those two options: Good Pres/Poor Speaker vs. Good Speaker/Poor Pres.

And the Torah says a dishonorable son shall be put to death. The Talmud mitigates this by saying that such a thing is an impossibility. You might be able to get elected, but I don't think you can be deemed a great president without the ability to inspire people to see things your way.

I believe Abraham Lincoln was a great President but so many people didn't see things his way that there was a civil war.

Thomas Jefferson was a notoriously poor public speaker. After his first State of the Union address was inaudible to most of Congress, he never gave another one. The rest he sent to Congress in writing. There are also reports that he had a lisp.

Lincoln's voice was often described as high-pitched, unpleasant and shrill.

I guess it shows what good writing can do.

No it's not. I heard him plenty of times in "Great Moments..." and his voice was quite deep and very powerful.


:D

More Dennis Weaver than Raymond Massey, I guess. Maybe I should refine that to say that it's hard to imagine somebody ranking as a great president in our modern media age without being considered an eloquent speaker.