"Anybody tried a little diplomacy lately?"

Over the last eight years rather a great deal of it Don.

Your current administration using purely diplomatic means resolved the rather serious situation regarding North Korea. A certain amount of diplomatic effort has gone into the Israel/Palestine peace process. On the other hand, the EU has been negotiating with Iran for seven years now with absolutely no result.

Inside Iran things are changing, the sanctions imposed both unilaterally and by the UN are having an effect, you have a very young population who are largely critical of the situation within. As the old line goes, "Somethings got to give" and that will occur without the US having to do a thing.

On the subject US Foreign Policy in the region seems to have dropped out of the topics being discussed by the Democrat Presidential hopefuls. Just as well Senator Joe Biden has pulled out as by now I'd be sending him quotes from his statements directed at General Petraeus last September.

Further down the thread McGrath of Harlow, came out with "Arriving at an opinion after examining the evidence isn't "prejudice".

Very true Kevin, provided that all the available evidence is examined and provided that what you are examining is indeed evidence. Bobert tends to run on rumour and unsupported opinion that backs his adopted point of view. An example of this was given in his "little review":

***C student in college but probably was closer to being a d student but rich kids get a favorable grading...

Ask Bobert to provide links to the evidence he examined before making the above statement, one part of which (i.e. the grade obtained) is fact the other complete and utter supposition (Boberts prejudice is showing).

***AWOL from Texas Air National Guard...

Not true, and absolutely no evidence to support that statement.

***Given the Texas Rangers by his daddy and the team's profits went down...

Not true, any examination of the transaction will prove that GHWB had absolutely nothing to do with it. Where GWB got the money to buy into the Team is perfectly transparent for anybody that wants to look.

***Given Harkin Energy by his daddy and he ran it into the ground right after taking $700,000 out of the kitty for himself...

Not true, again I would like to see the "evidence" that Bobert examined to back this up, as with the above the deals were all perfectly transparent. No money was "taken out of the kitty" as Bobert puts it. GWB objected to Harken plans to drill offshore Bahrain as it was clearly outside the company's core business. He resigned from the board and sold his stock, his dealings with Harkin were subject to a full investigation and nothing untoward was found - I imagine that that investigation did examine evidence to reach that conclusion.

***Cokehead and alcoholic

Evidence Bobert? The man admits to having for period in his youth of "drinking too much" but accusations of drug abuse and alcoholism seems to belabour the point a bit. All of this what near twenty years ago? I wonder if Bobert and all others who lap this sort of stuff up apply the same yardstick to themselves?

***Convicted drunk driver and...

Not a criminal offence at the time his drivers licence was suspended and he paid a fine.

...worst president in American history, bar none but given his record it shouldn't come as any surprise...

Opinion, pure opinion, not fact. On the subject of losers, GWB put his own money into Arbusco Oil, which merged to become Spectrum 7 Energy, which was taken over by Harkin Energy. At every step of the way GWB translated his stake in the form of stock and made a profit. If that is "losing" then I know a large number of businessmen who would like to lose in a similar fashion. With the money he got from his sale of Harkin Stock he paid for his stake in the Rangers, which he sold in 1998 after eight years for an enormous profit - I just love Boberts definition of losing.

Everything that Bobert comes out with is coloured by his prejudice and based on lies, half-truths, misrepresentations and myth.