Ted Haggard

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

With regard to Fox, I was talking more about their actual news coverage than their shows. I do like some of the shows. I think O'Reilly is alright most of the time. At times, he can be really obnoxious but most of the time he is alright. He is very conseravtive on most issues but he has liberal guests on all the time that he debates. at least the liberal guest's voice is heard and O"Reilly will always give the guest the last word which I like.

With regard to Hannity and Colmes, the show is probably not quite as balanced as it should be beacuse Hannity is really the star of the show and he comes on much stronger than Colmes. I'm not a big fan of Hannity. He's a conservative hack. The guests on the show are usually alright. they usually have a good mix of both liberals and conservatives.

With regard to your question about Bush, I do not think that his job approval has been hurt by media coverage. I think the media has been fair with him overall. I think the only thing that has really hurt him is the war. And the war would not have hurt him at all if it would have gone well. Americans are results oriented. If we would have won the war, everyone would be happy.

I agree with you about Drudge. I like it because it has a good mix of articles from both liberal and conservative papers. It has all the interesting headlines from all the big newpapers.

I think Bush would be doing far better on the public's view of his handling of the war, not to mention that the war itself might go better, if he cut Rumsfeld loose. I'm not hopping on any bandwagon, I've felt this for a couple years.

I just do not get Bush's devotion and while I guess I admire Rumsfeld's desire to get the job done, I think we'd all be better off with change there.

It's been 5 years since 9/11 and four years of war. If the country were a corporation, Defense was it's biggest division and Rumsfeld was in charge of that division, there is not much chance he'd still be in the job. Why is this different?

When things go bad, people get stale and you can't replace all of the troops. But you can change the leadership and sometimes change for the sake of change alone is reasonable.

Frankly, this puzzles the hell out if me.