Exactly (I guess I missed that quote..)Actually that's not true at all. The democrats lost control of the senate because at the all the policies from the Clinton administration were coming from the far left. If you remember that was when Newt was in power and the republicans were pushing the contract with America. Being very politically shrewd Clinton basically stole welfare reform from the republicans. The problem is we are still subsidizing bastard children. Using a typical democrat tactic they simply changed the name of welfare to entitlement programs. In other words the government and people that don't work are entitled to your money.
See, I agree with almost all of your post (except bombing mosques), but none of that matters to some of these Michale Moore lovers. They say, "hey...wait a minute! Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11! Now everyone hates us! Bush sucks!" That's pretty much it in a nutshell for them. They see this problem the way the pussy ass europeans saw Hitler. This is just history "nearly" repeating itself. It would be history repeating itself (except terrorism spread across the glod would replace Hitler) if Gore were president and possibly Kerry; I have more respect for Kerry than Gore. Gore is a nutcase now. I'm pretty much done in this thread as far as this is concerned. I mean, IH, is a smart guy so I'm not going to demean him in that way, but he doesn't see fundamental reasons for justifications (and I guess to the same token I don't see his reasons for GWB and his admin being complete dickwads). There's nothing we can do to convince each other.I think we need to put Iraq into context. Three thousand people died on 9-11 in the worst terrorist attack in the history of the United States. If I am president I am sure as hell going to do every thing I can to make sure that doesn't happen again. You have intelligence telling us they are possibly have nuclear weapons. We know Iraq was spending money on materials that could have been used to make nuclear weapons. UN inspectors have not been Iraq for some time even tough he was in violation of many UN resolutions. We know that Sadam was bribing the UN, France, Germany , and Russia. In fact If my memory serves me correctly we found French made missiles in Iraq with the year 2002 on them. So the president made the decision to hit Iraq. I personally can't fault him for that. I think there are things we need to do here that are more important such as boarder security, overhauling the INS, and giving local PD the power to deport Illegal. The problem I have is there seems to be a politically correct ideology with the fighting of the war. IE not wanting to hurt anyone's feeling because we bombed a mosk full of people that were shooting at us, if there is a particular town or area that is a problem instead of blowing it up we send in troops to get shot at, and continually letting people like Al-Sadr live elevating him to a hero status. IMO those are the mistakes we made.
As far as the mosques, I think it was smart not to bomb the Mosque, b/c that would really piss people off and if our objective is to keep the country as passive as possible (note: as) until we get the hell out bombing a mosque would be akin to poking a beehive with a stick and not intending on poisoning the whole hive when they get pissed at us. I would like to bomb the mosques and blow Al-Sadr into tiny pieces, but I just dont think it would be the smartest decision given out current status and our objectives.
Other than that :goodpost: