I meant that I believed the "restrain" comment was a calculated comment tailored specifically ("scientifically" -- i.e. measured through polling, etc.) to appeal to a demographic; the demographic that he needed to reach out to in 2004 in order to regain the White House. The demographic he had alienated in his first term. I'm speaking of fiscal conservatives. He needed to reach out to them and assure them and calm their fears. I know many conservatives who were willing to give him a shot and voted for him again based on this promise (a promise which was not casually, but specifically made). Before any politician makes such a major statement in any speech (and I know this because my father was a political speech writer for a time) it is all planned and calculated to appeal to very specific demographics. So that's what I mean by "science." I have no way of knowing for certain that he knew he was being untrue, just an opinion based on the pattern he had demonstrated for his first 4 years in office -- that of massively expanding government, spending and not rejecting pork. Hope that makes it a bit clearer and eases your heart. I know it is painful to have someone you admire attacked in any way and, after what you've sacrificed for me and mine, I wanted to be clear. In any case, whoever you are, you are an amazing person because you have been willing to lay down your own life if necessary so people like me can continue expressing ourselves and our opinions freely. And I thank God for it. Best to you & yours.

I can understand your feelings and respect them. However, I was not referring to Iraq. If you recall, by 2008, that was no longer the most important issue on voter's plates, nor was it the anti-Bush mantra the left was chanting loudest. I was referring to the larger issue that, ultimately, devastated the Republican party, caused fiscal conservatives to loose faith in their leadership, and, in the last two elections, handed the White House, House and Senate over to the far, far left. I am speaking of (to quote G.W. Bush himself) "restraining federal spending." This was a direct promise he made to the American people -- after angering fiscal conservatives over his massive government expansion and validation of pork spending in 2001 - 2004 -- and he broke it. Yes, I know, the current admin is spending 10x more, but it was this untruth that paved the way to their success -- a success that is now (thankfully!) evaporating for the exact same reason. Thank you for your service to our country. God bless!

The Cato Institute's 2005 Policy Analysis
"The Grass Is Not Always Greener -- A Look at National Healthcare Systems Around the World"

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-613.pdf

Thanks, Stan. I'm a history buff and when I came across this info recently, I just couldn't resist. The parallels are just so clear.

Great article. Thanks for the info.

Thanks for reading.

Congrats on having such a smart daughter.

Thanks. From your lips to the god of Internet's ears!

I've heard this a lot and I think it's an interesting point. Like freedom without responsibility, emotion without reason also leads to big trouble.

I know Evan. He's a very funny guy as well as thoughtful and intelligent. And you're right about the balance between freedom and responsibility. One without the other = big trouble for any society!