I believe history will judge Bush okay. You should have heard and read the things they said about Lincoln. By far, our most hated and loved president. Strong leaders are always derided by those with short vision. Liberals hate anyone who stands up for America against her enemies. Always have and always will, but they don't mind enjoying the benefits of those brave enough to confront the evil they don't have the guts to do themselves.

Lincoln "Failures" List
Lost job in 1832.
Defeated for state legislature in 1832.
Failed in business in 1833.
Elected to state legislature in 1834.
Sweetheart died in 1835.
Had nervous breakdown in 1836.
Defeated for Speaker in 1838.
Defeated for nomination for Congress in 1843.
Elected to Congress in 1846.
Lost renomination in 1848.
Rejected for land officer in 1849.
Defeated for U.S. Senate in 1854.
Defeated for nomination for Vice President in 1856.
Again defeated for U.S. Senate in 1858.
Elected President in 1860.

That's why I just laugh when liberals spew all the anti-Bush and anti-Reagan crap. They're stupid when it comes to history.

You know what the really stupid part of all this is?
Lincoln would have been the LIBERAL of his time in advocating that the slaves should be freed, bucking the traditional system.

And the part about liberals not being "brave enough to confront the evil"???
EVERYBODY agreed that we should go after al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
THAT isn't the issue.

The issue is IRAQ, which had no WMDs.
And despite your lie, it isn't "bravery" which is the issue for Iraq.
The issue is whether or not we should throw away thousands of our soldier's lives, costing us tax-payers billions of dollars, for ?????
WHERE are the benefits of our actions in Iraq?
Oh yeah. I forgot. Our government's OWN REPORTS say that terrorism is INCREASING because of our actions.

Alias, why don't YOU be brave enough to admit what the REAL issues are instead of calling liberals "cowards" to avoid the problem?

Liberals don't get the war on terror. You don't get it.

No, alias, we get it.
What YOU don't get is what our REAL OBJECTIONS are regarding Iraq.

1) It has no link to al Qaeda or 9/11. It's embarrassing for the president to continue to claim so, especially after he admitted there was no link.

2) A couple thousand U.S. soldiers died so we could convict Saddam of less than a couple hundred murders.
Something is wrong with that picture.

3) We have INTRODUCED terrorism into the area. Our efforts in Iraq have RAISED the terrorist threat. Not reduced it.
It's like fighting fire with gasoline.


These are but a few of the problems that exist.
Feel free to actually address any of them.
Or just continue to ignore the arguments with meaningless comments like "we don't get it" as you ignore what we EXPLICITLY get...

You just proved my point. You don't get the war on terror. When you state that the USA introduced terrorism to Iraq, you have just proven my point. You don't get it.

This was the GOVERNMENT'S OWN REPORT that admitted this as true.
Geez. Deny it all you want, but this IS what is happening.
YOU don't seem to get that.

Where in the report does it say we introduced terrorism to Iraq? Show me.

It's really enjoyable when I have to show you even the smallest little thing that you obviously can't remember because it happened farther back than the last five minutes.

Geezus. Take notes if you can't remember stuff.

Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat - New York Times

Rumsfield's talents will be missed...

YouTube - Rumsfeld Gets Cute At The Podium

I can say that everyone I know over here was very excited to hear about the change of the SecDef, and the overall outcome of the elections! It brought us new hope that things may finally get better.

I for one think that the Democrats are probably as bad as the republicans, we really need REAL change, but this is a start...

I don't know anything about the new SecDef, but he can't be any worse or more insane..