OzOne wrote in message

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 04:45:15 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:

While true--and I generally subscribe to that philosophy--I'd rather find
someone with substance and integrity. Of course I'm dreaming where
politics
are concerned.

So you don't regard a man who can stand up and admit he got it wrong
as having substance and integrity?

Depends. If he admits he was in error because he WAS in error, perhaps.
But if he changes his tune only to take the opposition to the incumbent,
then he's little more than a political hack. Joe Lieberman did exactly this
in the 2000 election. He had always been pro-life, but to be on the ticket
with Al Gore he had to flip-flop to pro-choice. Now he's back to pro-life
again. Political hack.


BTW has GWB acknowledged yet that there never were WMD in Iraq at the
time he was planning his invasion (after he was elected that is)

Does this assume that he wasn't planning to invade Iraq prior to the
election? I think it was high on his list if elected.

or
that he and his Govt were wrong in assuming that Iraq posed an threat
to the US, or has he just changed the story to one of saving the
people of Iraq?

Not that I've heard. I bought his pre-war rhetoric, but I also said I'd
curtail my support of him if he were wrong about WMDs. He was wrong, I feel
cheated, and he won't get my vote this November.

Max