H john,

>>In case you don't know. Ronald reagan is dead. And for sanity, I'm not sure why reversing the process for accepting the metric system (the metric system was almost accepted in the late '70) is an actual prove of sanity. Inches, foot, miles, yards, pounds, stone... it all of course makes sense, esspecially if you try to convert one into another. This conservatism actually is in the end going to isolate you.
>>
>>I've not seen a lot of sanity in the republican party lately. Started a war on false grounds, don't know how to make peace, are violating laws by tapping phonelines without permission from any court, torturing POW in cuba, numerous corruption scandals, lead by a former alcohol and drug addict (happened before with J.F. Kennedy) with the IQ of a peanut. And of course they will blame the democrats. Tssss,..... you must be very loyal to the party to actually buy all this crap and still have the nerve to blame the liberals.

>Both parties are guilty of putting party politics above the good of the country. However, the Democrats went a little funny in the head about 5 years ago and it's why they're losing seats in Congress and national power overall.

I'm not sure what you refer to with funny in the head, but this is not the issue really. It is about the mud throwing and making easy statments like "liberal". Whether this is done by one or the other, does not really matter IMO. It is just a shame, and its making your politician look like clowns, scum and hypocrites in the eyes of the outsiders, esspecially when watching FOX or CNN.

>As to the false grounds, seems to me it was an honest mistake as everyone believed the whole WMD theory. Clinton used the "falsity" to bomb Iraq repeatedly.

There has been a lot writting in this respect, but the facts do not take away that your administration did open a can of worms that was neccesary at all.

>As to phone taps, it's not domestic per se and it's legal.

hmmm, because bush made it legal? There is a lot of resistance within your government and even within the republican party to this very same issue, arguing that bush is missusing its power to undermine anyones right to privacy. You realize that it gives him the power to put taps on political enemies as well. Scary isn't it ?

>As to Bush having the "IQ of a peanut" - a very common liberal attack with little basis in fact
based on the haughty assumption that liberals are somehow smarter than conservatives.

We're not all liberal in europe but we basically all agree on this point from the start. It is a fact that his run for president was scattered with misspeaks and clumsy statements, inmediately leading to this conclusion. That election had put the basis for that. In the case of his father and ronald reagan this was less so.

Of course the republicans come with an IQ test done some 35 years ago in the military that shows an IQ of 126 or so. That number actually means nothing nowerdays. IQ test scores are adjusted every year as 100 points should be the average. I'd bet that every highschool kid would do as good or better than that with the same tests. IQ tests of such long time ago are tremendously devaluated by nowerdays standards. This all is aside form the fact that this test was done before he drowned his brain in alcohol and drugs.

>Liberals label Bush as dumb - as they did his father and as they did Reagan. If they're so dumb, how come they consistently out-manuever Dems?

Because they are elected by people who are one the same IQ level?? And for the record, bush got himself into a lot of trouble lately. Why do you think his last statement (I can't recall the name of the event) was so mild where previously he was aggressive. Where did his statement of 'OIL addiction' come from?, suggesting to look for alternative energy sources. That is a rather liberal statement from a republican president.

Walter,