These people of Iraq have been saved and are clearly better off now than before. How better off where the Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotians when we prematurely washed our hands of Vietnam? One can argue whether we should have gone in to begin with but that point is mute, trying to reverse history always leads to worse failures, we were in Vietnam, we are in Iraq, and we have responsibilities. What would it have been like if one of the people most politically responsible for this bailing of responsibilities had become President (KERRY)? Like I said this is a test for the left, not for the right and I don’t care how much you focus on what you think are indisputable failures, the left is failing the test even worse. We are in Iraq and the left offers to compound the failures, what are the solutions from here out? This is why the public, stupid or not, in the end don’t trust the left on such matters. By the lefts standards every War where we didn’t cut and run would be was a colossal failure riddled with unforgivable errors by the Commander and Chief… well clearly war is a failure of mankind but as long as there are humans we will have them. Liberals act as if War is an option we can always negotiate away and while you navel gaze the world moves on and shit happens, like Georgia.

Concerning Russia’s invasion of Georgia I hear Barak say “both sides better be careful” he then sticks his finger in the wind and revises his statement. Does he have a core belief or are his true beliefs masked because they are unacceptable, especially on Security matters, or does his flip flopping on such issues indicate he is less prepared to lead? This guy didn’t even have the judgment to get the hell away from Jeremiah Wright and a host of other nutcases, was his association with them due to cynical needs for street cred among blacks, money, or does he actually believe these things? All point to deep flaws. I voted for Hillary and would of supported her in the general election but in no way would vote for Barak.

You can lay 9/11 at Bush’s feat all you want but shit happens and we all argued about what to do after 9/11. The whole Congress, Democrat and Republican decided what to do and the Democrats did everything they could at first to give tepid support, then two faced support (I voted against it before I voted for it) to downright undermining the process they collectively voted to support. They can’t even admit the level of success the surge has attained because they are so politically committed to its failure. Again this is a test for the left not the right. Once the debate has ended and we have made our choice, we went into Iraq with overwhelming Congressional support. The left talks about concern for human rights yet turn a blind eye to the facts when politically expedient. You did it in ascribing Iraqis plight to Bush without acknowledging their Saddam days of a terror as being much worse, it was also done when the left callously ignored the consequences and followed Kerry’s dimwitted pronouncement that there would be no genocide when we cut support to Vietnam, tell this to the Cambodians, Laotian and Vietnamese.

The left loves to criticize action, yes War is hell but you have only bickering to offer. Barak’s “we’ll sit down and talk to the tyrants” is a joke and people know it. Barack’s “both sides should be careful” is also joke and people know it. He should win in a landslide but if he doesn’t don’t fall into your people are stupid routine as such arrogance is ugly, your arguments are one sided but then again you know this. You are indeed everything you project upon those you demean. Like the rest of the left, you need to learn to accept disagreement as something less then sinister, and also with more grace.

The point is that you Bush defenders are essentially on crack philosophically, ethically, and factually. Iraq is going to be such a long term shame to this country, and that is a situation where the blood is all over Bush’s hands. The number of Iraqi civilian casualties is of particular national disgrace and the source of the most cynical, disingenuous lies, as well as outright denial by the bulk of the American population, especially those on the right. Yeah, we had 3000 people killed on 9/11, but that’s chump change compared to what the Iraqis have suffered since — the *lowest* numbers (from iraqbodycount.org, which Bush’s people have been quitely referencing) have them at about 90,000, while the more comprehensive and realistic surveys and samplings have them at over a million. And bear in mind that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 or bin Laden’s group. If Bush needed to invaded some other country aside from Afghanistan, it should have been Iraq’s enemy, Iran — the evidence was pretty clear that al-Qaeda and their Kurdish buds, Ansar al-Islam, were getting help from Iran, and NOT Iraq. Maybe there was a typo in the memo, eh?

With the US mainstream media so weakened by corporate control and bloggers serving up mostly dopey opinions, rumor and crap, it’s hard to be optimistic that there will be that many smart, well-informed votes made this coming September. But I can accept it — it already happened in 2004 after all….

Tell that to the parents of all the Americans that have died or have been badly wounded in Iraq. That 1993 World Trade Center bombing killed six people and injured 1,042. In 1998, the terrorist bombings at the U.S. embassies in Africa killed 12 Americans and injured 7. The 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen killing 17 and injured 39. In contrast, on Bush’s watch, 3000 got killed on 9/11, and in Iraq the count so far is: 4139 American soldiers killed, 30,324 wounded; 500+ US contractors killed; and 129 journalists killed, 85 by murder and 44 by acts of war, including 14 by US forces. Best estimates of Iraqi casualties put them at at least 1 million.

If you voted for Bush in 2004, you were an easily suckered fool; if you to this day think that was the right thing to do, you are hopelessly and inexcusably too incompetent and uninformed to go anywhere near a voting booth come November; and if you’re planning on voting for McCain, then you’re also planning on continuing with the degradation of US strength, integrity, influence and prestige that Bush started.

Sorry, but that is what it is.

not limited enough, though …

Though I have always voted Democrat (since Carter), however I am one of those Democrats that voted for Bush this last election, I will also be one who votes for McCain this time. I fully plan to vote Democrat again in the future when fellow Democrats like you, Harry Reid and the rest stop treating political opponents like President Bush as if they were the cause of all ill in this world and the number one major enemy to America.

You say it’s almost “7 long years and Bin Laden is still on the loose” as a means to belittle Bush. You say it not out of concern but as an insult and political hammer to score points? Does this show people sober mindedness and evidence that we Democrats are Security minded and get the WOT? I say it has been 7 long years that we haven’t been attacked, something all people on both sides of the aisle predicted would happen. You show little insight to what the War on Terror is all about. It isn’t about revenge it is about Security, I tell you the glass is half full routines on everything President Bush touches are tiresome and grow old and makes us Democrats appear as if we root for his failure and fear successes. Sure, we Democrats will continue to poll better on most issues then Republicans but we will in dangerous times continue to lose the Presidency because they show such a lack of understanding on issues such as the War on Terror.

Remember Clinton won during times of supposed peace after the fall of the Soviet Empire, most people get it, yes they are tired of Iraq and think there have been costly mistakes, they don’t like the risks Bush has taken, but they understand the purpose and the benefits if successful, don’t mistake this for being anti-War. They know we Democrats have shown little faith in the outcome, little faith in the surge, yet the surge is working. They know we Democrats are left with arguing about the costs in terms of money, human lives, etc, which are all very legitimate mind you, but we have also once shown the populace once again they have cause to doubt our will (Democrats) on Security issues.

For us Democrats this is Vietnam, not for Republicans. This is our test and if we Democrats continue to behave as we are, we will once again lose all credibility for a whole new generation on Security issues. I never voted for Reagan I now understand why many Democrats did, this is why may will vote for McCain.

It’s almost 7 years later and bin Laden is still on the loose, worldwide terrorism rate are up, Afghanistan, which was the one good bust that even our worst enemies wouldn’t begrudge us, is not only still a problem, but a growing one, and Iraq….anybody who uses the word “success” with that clusterf*ck of lies, incompetence, death and destruction is probably not going to a happy place in the afterlife.

You can take that cigar and….

Roll that in your cigar and smoke it.