Funny. This port security issue is nothing more than "racial profiling". This time, on part of liberals, who see an issue they can attack Bush on. This is so hypocritical.

Isn't it true that polls drive the news, not vice versa; and remember--pollsters don't work for free...

Politicians listen to them, and then deduce that the American people want this or that...

And doesn't this equate to some kind of fantastic opportunity for unscrupulous pollsters to manipulate the political environment...

In the late 1940s, the most frigid period of the cold war, American intelligence services competed with communist activists abroad to influence European labor unions...

Allegedly, Philip Graham, a graduate of the Army Intelligence School, and then publisher of the Washington Post, was director of the program, code-named MOCKINGBIRD...

According to a former CIA analyst, respected members of the N.Y. Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles, plus hundreds of stringers, were involved in the "power play."

In fact, in '82 the CIA openly admitted that reporters on the CIA payroll have acted as case officers to agents in the field...

And so ya know, my point is: rather than this being a case where "sticking with" the Pres. might no be such a great idea, actually this is a contrived opportunity for Hillary, or whomever, to get up on the platform and reap lots of "good press" by offering an "in favor" viewpoint...

Sort of "funny" how two Miami Herald reporters have complained that the paper no longer allows them their head in engaging in their practice of investigative reporting...

I just took a poll... of myself.

I got a 100% response to the following question:

"Did you get lost somewhere between the 'racial profiling' thing and the 'CIA (mentioned repeatedly) analyst, respected members of the N.Y. Times, Newsweek, CBS' and the '... a contrived opportunity for Hillary, or whomever, to get up on the platform and reap lots of "good press"...' thing."

I responded to the question in the affirmative.

That's mostly because I think that the CIA is not CBS (or the others mentioned in the comment), that the CIA reports (especially after Goss became the head to the RNC, and I don't think companies... excuse me... recently supporting terrorist activities countries) can be racially profiled.

Unless of course it's France. If it's France we can profile it any way we wish.

I wavered on the answer for a second. Primarily because, since the Swift Boat Ad Commandos came on the scene, I realized that some sh*t does stick to the walls in some small- minded people's homes.

But, in the end, I agreed I was lost.

I'm glad I took the poll.

Actually, it seems that the only thing the poll says (considering the split) is that the public trusts the Republicans just a little less than they do the Democrats.

I figure that small difference has something to do with track records, military service, bills proposed, and book learnin'.

I got so excited by the stimulating comments that I made a critical error (or did I?).

I think that the line that reads, "... especially after Goss became the head to the RNC..." should read, "especially after Goss became the head reporting to the RNC...".

My apologies... unless of course, the first version was right. In that case I apologize for the correction.

I think I'll take a poll of myself and mark myself "independent" and respond with "undecided".