political : WHY HASN'T BUSH EVER TAKEN CHARGE OF THE WAR IN IRAQ? [+] serious ballot by cranky ACTIVE Wed Nov 29, 06 - Mon Aug 24, 09 Bush Adrift A disturbing study in lassitude. By Rich Lowry, National Review Is President Bush still the nation’s commander in chief? Yes, he continues to return the salute when boarding Marine One, but it’s a role he sometimes seems on the verge of abdicating. Gen. George W. Casey Jr. told Bush a few months ago that they would wait and see how Iraq looked after Ramadan, which ended in late October. Well, Iraq looked worse. Now the administration seems to want to wait to see the conclusions of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group or one of its internal reviews of Iraq policy before making any new departures. In the meantime, Iraq looks still worse. As the administration waits, Iraq burns. Bush has been at the mercy of events in Iraq. Perhaps that’s forgivable. Even Abraham Lincoln famously confessed, “Events have controlled me.” What’s less understandable is being controlled by other people’s advice. Bush has been presiding over the Iraq War for three years, and he really has no better ideas than might bubble up from his national-security council or from an Iraq Study Group including the likes of Sandra Day O’Connor and Vernon Jordan about how to prosecute the war? Bush simply has failed to run his war. Historian Eliot Cohen describes how, in contrast, the best American wartime president conducted himself: “Lincoln had not merely to select his generals, but to educate, train and guide them. To this end he believed that he had to master the details of war, from the technology to the organization and movement of armies, if only to enable himself to make informed judgments about general officers.” Bush has taken the opposite approach and — for all his swagger and protectiveness of executive prerogatives — is becoming a disturbing study in lassitude in the executive branch. (National Review Online) * * * * * * * * Clearly, there is little argument that Bush hasn't been in charge of the Iraq War, that Rumsfeld and Cheney have been the real button pushers. However, even if he wanted to take take over command of the Iraq War, does Bush really have the capacity for such a responsibility? Yes, Bush is more than capable enough to manage the war No, Bush can't tie his shoes without Karl Rove Ballot #106069 : SEE RESULTS Comment: show your vote with comment?

v 2.0

© BESTANDWORST.COM

smile bank: