Bold words, considering our current, Republican president, with his sky-high 20% approval rating, having hovered in the 20s and low 30s for most of his presidency, and his myriad contributions to our country: A struggling economy that in total has added less than a quarter the jobs as added by even Clinton (not keeping pace even with population growth), the credit crunch, the subprime mortgage meltdown, the collapse of numerous banks, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Bear Sterns, the skyrocketing of gas prices from the $20s to $140, the depression of the dollar to the lowest levels ever ($1.60 to the Euro now), the squandering of the surplus and the explosion of the deficit and the national debt to incomprehensible levels, a population that says by 81% that we're headed in the wrong direction, a seven-year war in Afghanistan that is still in deep trouble and stuck in muck, nearly a trillion dollars already sent into the war in Iraq, no energy policy to speak of in the face of our never-ending addiction to foreign oil that provides numerous dictatorships like Venezuela, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Russia, with staggering quantities of cash to buttress their regimes, a politicized-discredited-demoralized justice department, the travesty of New Orleans that continues to this day, violations of a Constitution that you seem to treasure so much and that the president is sworn to uphold (several clauses Article I section 8, habeus corpus in section 9, Article IV sections 1 and 2, Article VI on treaties, and Amendments 4, 5, 6, 8, and possibly 9), incompetent hacks filling up important posts like Brownie at FEMA, images of Guantanomo all over the world all to hold on to a measly few hundred terrorists that represent a drop in the bucket compared to the millions out to get us, and more gaffes and mishaps and foolish acts of personal idiocy than even Carter seemed capable of (and that's saying a lot considering Mr. Killer Rabbi). Can you believe this was possible coming from a guy who dodged the draft like his vice president and all his other cronies, was born into Connecticut luxury and played a fake cowboy all his life on his little ranch, and never did a thing with his life till he was 40? Who'da thunk?

Perhaps you should be worried that Obama will be as bad as our current president.

A few other things I forgot to mention: At least two recessions on his watch, the manufacture of at least 8 warheads-worth of nuclear material by North Korea, the rise of Iran (sound familiar, Mr. Carter?) with its myriad proxies all around the region and its nuclear program, the rise of Russia, the explosion of health care prices and the shift of the vast majority of doctors over to demanding universal health care, the collapse of GM, Bush's groveling at the feet of the Saudis recently over oil production (they turned down the request of the almighty US president)... Hey, actually, if Obama had connections to a the dictatorial leadership of an Arab country that exports fanaticism like Bush has with Saudi Arabia, you'd be all over him for it. Do you like the Saudi royal family or something?

And, to top it off, the utter incompetence that saw the worst terror attack on American soil committed a full *8 months* into the presidency of this tough-on-our-enemies Republican president, despite the existence of much evidence that a competent administration could have used to prevent it. (Yes, Clinton did a poor job, too, but Bush has nothing to be proud of either.) The reason more than a tiny and idiotic fringe of people don't think it was a conspiracy is because everyone knows that this administration doesn't even have the basic competence to have pulled it off.

Silly me! I forgot a few more: Walter Reed, troop armor, Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman, Terry Schiavo, Donald "We go to war with army we have" Rumsfield, Alberto "I don't recall" Gonzalez, the Harriet Myers judicial nomination that even Bush's supporters all laughed at, defections by a speechwriter and a press secretary and a treasury secretary and a secretary of state and a terrorism chief among others, a seven-fold increase in pork-barrel projects, a staggering and unfunded Medicare prescription plan, a trillion dollar of debt owned by China (a five-fold increase since 2000), the hilarity when he tried to find a "war czar" and every 4-star general turned him down (he ended up having to get a 3-star general), and, of course, the "pretzel incident." Not to mention pushing for Palestinian elections over Israeli objections and the subsequent win by Hamas, or going totally AWOL over Lebanon for the six years of Hezbollah's buildup between Israel's withdrawal in 2000 and the war in 2006 and the capitulation of the Lebanese government to Hezbollah. Meanwhile, Israel, whose leadership originally opposed the Iraq war before it began in secret discussions with the administration (according to Miller and Wilkerson---eat your heart out Walt and Mearsheimer), for good or ill, is negotiating on its own with Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas, over American objections. They aren't waiting for the US any more. Who could blame them? They can't afford to make the kinds of mistakes the Bush administration has regularly made.

Do you remember the excited receptions that Kennedy and Reagan used to get when they traveled the world, even Europe? Reagan almost couldn't walk around in Ireland, the masses rallied around him so much. The only place Bush got an excited rally in the last several years was Albania, and largely because of what Clinton did there ten years ago. If you think there's no cost to this, then you're not being honest.

That was supposed to say Mr. Killer Rabbit, not Rabbi. This was in reference to Carter's hilarious claim that he was attacked by a killer rabbit on row-boating trip. I could also have pointed to equally hilarious his claim of UFO visitation.

Although given Carter's vile recent books and speeches and travels, maybe he believes in Killer Rabbis too.... That's certainly one point Bush has in his favor---at least he doesn't seem to have a deep-seated problem with Jews.

Images of Guantanamo?

WHO GIVES A CRAP.

How about the videos of live, bound, innocents having their throats cut and their heads cut off while masked men praise allah?

You failed to mention in your lengthy rant that Congress has an even lower approval rating than Bush.

If you think that the US will elect a guy with a 20 year close association with a black supremecist spiritual leader (who lives in a mansion), ultra leftists (Ayers), crooks (Rezko), hijab wearing supporters, America hating wife, then you are nuts.

I'm waiting for the next embarassing revelation on Obama.

The Clintons are pissed and even Jesse is pissed.

I hope the Obama campaign has their goggles on when the shit hits the fan.

Ha ha! That's like that Daffy Duck cartoon where Bugs calls him ugly, stupid, unsanitary, and crazy, and he retorts "Unsanitary?"

Woop dee do. You found one item on my list that you disagree with. As long as evil people are killing Americans, nothing we do matters. As long as Japan is destroying China, who cares if we intern hundreds of thousands of Japanese-Americans? Well, that certainly invalidates my entire argument! Now you can go back to feeling enamored with a guy who's association with the Saudi royal family, who are the driving force of radical fundamentalism in the world, make Wright look like a Saint, goes back even before he was born.

As for Congress, it's approval rating was in the dumps well before 2006, while the Republicans were still in control---twelve years of Republican control. Nice try. It would take Superman to bring those approval numbers back to detectable levels.

If you think America will elect a guy who has been repeatedly bailed out of his failed and incompetent business ventures by the Saudi royal family, then... oh, woops.

Or was tutored in his foreign policy by the Saudi foreign minister. Last I heard, in Saudi Arabia, women couldn't drive, it was illegal to be Jewish or Christian, the punishment for being gay was execution, 15 of the 19 hijackers came from there, and no country spends more money propagating radical fundamentalism around the world. If any Democrat were so closely affiliated with the Saudis, you know you'd be all over them for it. I smell hypocrisy.

Do you think that "talking" with nazi Germany and imperial Japan would have convinced them to stop their murderous march across Europe and Asia?

Socialist Stalin and national Socialist SHITler "talked" and even signed a Socialist non-aggression pact in 1939. How long did that Socialist pact last?

Did Chamberlains piece of paper prevent WW2?

Islamofascists have become the new nazis.

If you think that Bush is too close to Islamists, wait until more comes out on Obama. Even Obamas handlers want to distance him from hijabs.

Obama flipped and now wears the American flag lapel pin.

Obama flipped and now stands infront of American flags when he speaks to the press.

Obama is VERY vulnerable to the view of him that "The New Yorker" magazine cover illustrates.

Ah, that's how you know an argument has run out of steam, when you pull out the H-bomb, Hitler's name. Bin Laden is no Adolf Hitler, the latter in charge of the most technologically and industrially advanced and militarily powerful nation on Earth, who exterminated 11 million people in his Holocaust and started a war that took 60 million lives. Comparing Bin Laden to Hitler gives Bin Laden way too much credit. Bin Laden is sitting in a cave somewhere. And yet Bush, after 7 years, still can't find him, or Al-Zawahiri. We won WWII in four years. Bravo Commander in Chief!

And for your information, Bush is negotiating with North Korea, even though their regime comes closest to the Nazis of any regime on Earth today. And he has seen the rise of Iran to unprecedented levels of power. The proof is in the pudding. You can jump up and down and insist that other people might be worse as president, but you can't change the outcome of this presidency no matter how hard you try.

And you're jumping up and down over whether people wear flag lapel pins or stand in front of American flags. You certainly know what's important, don't you! Maybe if Bush stands in front of a large enough American flag, the sheer gravitational pull will solve all the problems he's created in the last 7 years.

Perhaps you can recall a day when we used to worry that actual H-bombs would start falling. Thirty years ago, one wrong move would have meant 100 million people dead in 24 hours. And we're supposed to piss our pants now because of Bin Laden running around his cave? We're the USA. Only a fool would think that this moron should scare us. Bin Laden can't destroy America---only we American's can, if we let him turn us into terrified panzies.

But by all means, go back into your magical dream world where Bush and Cheney are one of the great president/vice-president pairs, where Bush is a courageous and competent chief executive who inspires confidence and really can see inside the soul of Putin and who knows how to win wars (so far the score is zero), where everybody upset about the direction of the country and the war is a member of Code Pink and is in love with the terrorists, where boobs like Rezko and Wright are more dangerous and corrupt than the Saudis, where the puppet president Ahmadinejad is a threat on par with Hitler, where cavemen like Bin Laden make you afraid for your very lives, where doing anything but war means being exactly equivalent to Neville Chamberlain, where we can drill our way out of all of our energy problems, where gasoline is still reasonably priced, and where owing a trillion dollars to China and having spiraling deficits is no problem. You go live in that comfortable world, where you worry about whether Iranian movie critics are finding devious influences in Fiddler on the Roof. (Oh the humanity! How will we ever stop them???) The other 80% of Americans have real work to do.

Matt, what are you whining about?

YOU brought up WW2 in your post #8 with imperial Japan destroying China and the internment of Japanese living in the US.

Why would you leave out national Socialist SHITler? Was SHITler a minor player during WW2?

Matt, are any of the 19 hijackers of 9/11 still alive?

Have our "friends" the Saudis, Pakistanis, found OBL?

I agree that Saudi Arabia is a BIG part of the problem.

I like Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredos declaration that if the US were to suffer a nuke attack, the US should retaliate by Nuking Mecca.

CAIR took umbrage with Tancredo, but Tancredo refused to retract his statement.

Mecca and the Kabba are Islamofascisms, Wahabbisms soft spot.

If Israel were to suffer a nuke attack, would Mecca, Medina, Qom survive? Would Hindu majority India trust Muslim Pakistan with which it almost had a nuclear exchange, over land, Kashmir?

Matt, maybe your buddies can find OBL. There is a 27 million dollar reward from the US and Airline Pilots Association for information leading to the capture of OBL.

Maybe you think OBL is hiding in the White House?

The Islamofascist Regime of iran, the current day Jew-hating, America-hating, expansionist, imperialist, genocide threatening 21st century equivalent of nazi national Socialist Germany.

Will you still vote for BHO now that he's wearing an American flag lapel pin? What will you do?

Followers of OBL murdered almost 3,000 people with hijacked airplanes.

What would the death toll be if OBL or his fanbois get their hands on a Pakistani/North Korean designed nuke?

Do you think Islamists, North Koreans, Pakistanis care if millions of "infidels" die at their hands?

Matt, who would be your ideal candidate for US President?

Ah yes. I'm "whining." Have you really nothing better than that?

I intentionally didn't bring up Hitler because bringing up Hitler is the ultimate way to show that you have no argument. It's the ultimate straw man. Nobody today is like Hitler. Stalin, sure, but that was a long time ago.

But Iran and Ahmadinejad? You've got to be joking me. The US could crush Iran tomorrow like a bug, in one day, without breaking a sweat! The US air force and navy are totally ready to erase Iran from the map if the US government wished to do so, without even using any nukes. And I'm supposed to be quaking in my boots over Iran, worrying that it's the Nazi Germany of today? What are you a panzy? Perhaps you don't remember what Nazi Germany was like. It was the most powerful country on Earth at the time, with the most powerful military and an industrial giant, and there was a real concern that they might actually defeat us. And they took out 60 million people with them.

Iran is a primitive, backwater country utterly mired in poverty---it can't even feed its own people. It's getting us worried because it's on the road to achieving 1940's-level nuclear technology in a few years? Are you joking? Of course, the proof is in the pudding, For all Bush's talk talk talk that you seem to like so much (why are right-wingers so in love with tough talk---talk is cheap, that and all-important issues like flag pins), Iran's rise has taken place precisely over the course of Bush's administration. Bush's administration has seen the rise of Iranian proxies Hezbollah and Hamas to state-level powers. Them's the facts, whether you like it or not. There is zero chance Bush will attack Iran, US intelligence on Iran is utterly pathetic, and Bush is even opening up a new diplomatic outpost there. Yeah, the Iranian government is really quaking in their boots for sure. The one thing we have going for us is that the Iranian people hate their government even more than we hate their government, and they're some of the most pro-American people in the Middle East. (Somehow find a way, if you can, to wrap your brain around the idea that they are pro-American and Muslims at the same time.)

Sure, Israel has good reason to be worried about Iran. Israel has had to deal with genocidal lunatics trying to destroy their nation for sixty years. They haven't had a break, and certainly not during the Bush years, with an intifada and a full-scale war with Lebanon, not to mention Sderot and Ashkelon. May God continue bless them and befuddle their foes. But the US is not Israel. We're not a tiny country of 7 million people. It's time we realize that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Only sissies are afraid of impoverished, backwards countries like Iran that we could crush in a heartbeat. Only a fool would put Iran on a pedestal with Hitler's Germany, which posed a real threat to the existence of the free world.

As for that idiot Tancredo, well, I'm glad you've made clear that you like the guy's ideas. You almost make my argument for me. Needless to say, nothing warms the cackles of Bin Laden's heart more than to rally his minions by repeating Tancredo's words. Bin Laden wants this to be a colossal war against infidels trying to destroy Mecca. If Bin Laden thinks a terrorist attack would get Mecca destroyed, it will only give him further incentive---he'd know that a bombing of Mecca would turn hundreds of millions of Muslims to his side. Tancredo plays right into his hands. Not that Tancredo would have any reason to know any better.

As for who I'm going to vote for? Well, I'm entitled to keep that to myself. I think my arguments stand on their own, and don't need any help (or the opposite of help) based on my personal voting decisions. I will say that I would have voted McCain back in 2000 if I'd had the chance. But a boob with no expertise of any kind, no credentials, and no accomplishments up to age 40, waltzed in and took the nomination. He was born a screw up, he lived life as a screw up, and he'll die a screw up. I still like McCain. I think he'd make a pretty good president, although even a monkey would make a good president after the last seven years of gross, staggering incompetence. My only troubles are that McCain seems committed to many of the very policies that screwed things up these past seven years. But at least he has real heroism in his life. At least he understands what it means to suffer for your country, unlike Bush and Cheney.

The president is required to recite an oath before taking office, namely, that he or she shall uphold the Constitution. Bush has repeatedly violated the Constitution, more times and in more ways than almost any other president in history (even Nixon and Lincoln), as he freely admits, defending himself based on absurd theories of executive power that have no place in the Constitution, and on the necessities of security. As a citizen, it is my responsibility, and your responsibility, not to hand over the presidency to anyone who would violate that oath of office. I'm pretty sure McCain would uphold the Constitution, so he's okay. Then again, McCain is a notorious high-stakes gambler, calls his wife derogatory names in front of his friends (and that isn't even the wife he cruelly dumped, alienating her friends the Reagans for decades), flip-flopped on taxes, torture, and immigration, has openly admitted that he knows nothing about economics, doesn't know how to use the internet in the year 2008, and, in his first chance at executive experience, running a measly presidential campaign, has repeatedly demonstrated incompetence as a manager.

Obama is inexperienced with foreign policy, has made dumb choices of friends, has never done anything truly heroic in his life or served in the military, prefers flowery talk to real legislative accomplishment, and has a thin record. He has no solid background in economics either. Then again, he came from utterly nothing as a child of a teenage mom on food stamps who made his way to the top, he's an expert on Constitutional law, has been married to one woman all his life and apparently hasn't cheated on her (that we know of!), has plenty of pro-Israel and Jewish friends, and, as even his opponents can agree, is one of the most intelligent people to get this close to the presidency. And unlike Carter, he has enormous political intelligence, knowing how to play the game, for good or ill. What I don't believe are the disgusting email rumors, that he hates Jews, or he hates Israel, or he loves terrorists, or he hates America, or he refuses to say the pledge or sing the anthem, or that he loves Hamas, or that he's a secret radical Muslim, or that he went to some kind of radical madrassa, or that he was indoctrinated by his happily-pork-eating step-father into radical Islam, or that he genetically inherited Islam from his atheist father, or that he took the oath of office on a Koran, or that his wife hates America, or any of that other claptrap. He may turn out to be a mediocre, perhaps even a poor president. But only a fool thinks he's a force of evil bent on turning America into Hamasland. Or that he's a politically idiotic hick from Georgia with anti-Jewish issues like Carter.

My ideal presidential candidate is Thomas Jefferson. But he's not running this year as far as I know. They don't make 'em like that any more. So like everyone else, I'll have to compromise with someone I don't think is great, just like I do every four years.

By the way, I can't get over the title for this posting. What irony! I thought Marty was talking about Bush! I mean, stagflation and a cruddy economy, staggering gas prices, rock-bottom presidential approval ratings, and a rising, provocative Iran. That's Bush's legacy, and nobody else's. Credit where credit is due!

Credit indeed. I'll take a guess here and suggest the Matts of the world cannot link to similar venom they've spewed against Osama bin Laden himself, responsible for 9/11 and those audio and video recordings of WTC, the "falling man" videos, the audio recordings of people calling from high atop one of the WTC buildings, etc. But bring up the name of Bush and they're all high-minded with anger and fury, doncha know. It's that high-mindedness that brings it out, no doubt, or so we're to believe.

Credit where credit is due, and the Matts of the world are certainly due some credit.

I think of it as the trained seal syndrome or the Pavlovian effect syndrome, manifesting itself in the political arena.

Or if I'm wrong, Matt, do provide at least one link to similar righteous anger or spew, or whatever it is, that you've directed in the direction of OBL.

SHITler, the man that devout Muslims bless.

http://solidvox.com/Muslims-say-God-Bless-Hitler.jpg

SHITler, whose arabic translation "mein kampf" is a best seller in Arab countries.

http://conservablogs.com/velvethammer/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/mein-kampf-arabic.jpg

SHITler who was given the honorific Arabic name of "Abu Ali".

SHITler who declared War on the US on December 11, 1941, FIRST. The US RESPONDED by declaring War on nazi Germany.

Current day nazis like david duke go to Syria to show their support of fascist Baathist Syria and their goals.

You bring up WW2 and leave out any mention of SHITler because of your fear of "Goodwins Law"? HOW DUMB CAN YOU BE MATT???

You really believe that muslims don't have the same genocidal goals as SHITler?

You really think that primitive Islamofascist iran, equipped with long range missiles, working on enriching uranium, parading "Death to Israel" is not a threat?

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/death_to_israel.jpg

A primitive backwater country with missiles that can carry one-ton payloads and a range of 1,200 miles?

A country enriching uranium with 6,000 centrifuges

Those are the capabilities of a primitive, non-threatening country???

Matty, who are you kidding?

I'd like to see the US smash the Islamofascist regime of iran. It's long overdue. Payback for the IED's that have killed so many American soldiers. Payback for the US Embassy takeover.

Of course the US is much more powerful than the Islamofascist regime of iran.

I believe that even Israel is more powerful than the Islamofascist regime of iran, and is able to inflict a terrible retaliation.

I really wonder whether the Islamofascist regime of iran hates Israel more than it loves the continued existence of Mecca and the Kabba?

Certainly the Kabba and Mecca are worthy retaliatory targets. I would recommend a retaliatory strike during the Hajj in response to a WMD attack.

The chance of Bush attacking Islamofascist iran directly depends on the actions of Islamofascist iran.

Hopefully the Pro-America Muslims in Islamofascist iran are working to and will successfully end the 29 year Islamofascist nightmare they are living under.

But I'm afraid they will be as unsuccessful as the White Rose was during WW2.

You know what warms OBL's heart? How do you do it? ESP?

A retaliatory nuking of Mecca and the Kabba and Medina, Qom, may warm OBL's heart, but I think it won't warm the heart of other Muslims.

Maybe those Pro-America Muslims who revere Mecca will help the US get OBL and Al Qada and save Mecca from a terrible fate?

Islamofascists are at war all over the World.

Muslims show their respect, their tolerance for the holy sites of other religions by destroying them. Buddhas of Bamiyan Afghanistan, bombing churches, destroying Josephs tomb.

And they respect the holy sites of fellow Muslims by destroying them like the Golden Mosque in Iraq.

I like McCain too. A Vietnam Vet, true hero, with close ties to the military is what is needed today. Hopefully he'll give the OK to start drilling for oil in ANWAR.

Every airport in the World needs security checkpoints at airports to filter out Muslim terrorists. But we have to be "sensitive" so even little old ladies from Minneapolis in wheelchairs need to be screened. What a joke.

Do you really believe that Obama never heard anti-American rants over 20 years from his "spiritual advisor"?

Is BHO lying or is he dumb?

I'm glad you like Thomas Jefferson. He fought Muslim hijacker fanatics too.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/jefferson_papers/mtjprece.html

None of you have addressed any of the substantive points I've brought up, which leads me to believe that you have no argument. Instead, you keep resorting to ad hominem attacks, first questioning my political slant and now attempting to psychoanalyze me.

I don't rail on about Bin Laden on this site because that would be preaching to the choir. As you'll note just from my posts to this site, I have no objection to railing on endlessly about crazy anti-Israel/anti-American professors like Joseph Massad when I feel it would be useful.

You think I believe Bush is more terrible than Bin Laden? No, you couldn't think that. That would be a straw man, and you're all too smart to do that. Obviously Bin Laden isn't even in the same league. He's a disgusting terrorist, a genocidal maniac who is constrained right now only because he lacks the weaponry. If I have less to say about Bin Laden, it's because no effort needs to be made to argue against him. That he is a bottomless well of evil is self-evident. I saw 9/11 with my own eyes in NYC. I breathed the ashes. Where were you?

No, Bush isn't evil. He's just grossly incompetent, and a screw-up, among other failings not befitting even a mediocre president, many of which I've listed above if you'd stop and taken a look. For heaven's sake, after seven years fighting in Afghanistan, why does the Taliban even continue to exist? And why is it right now, in fact, resurgent? Why are Bin Laden's goons still training terrorists in that neighborhood? Why is our own intelligence service reporting that Al Qaeda is stronger now than at any time since 9/11? That's sheer, gross incompetence.

Even Clinton, fool though he was, won a war during his presidency, namely, against the genocidal regime of Milosevic, who died a ruined man in a jail cell. Not one American casualty, and no allies alienated. The Muslim population there are now such huge fans of America that even Bush gets mobbed by adoring crowds when he goes there, ten years later. Whatever his failings, Clinton actually won a war, which Bush, for all his bravado, has yet to do.

Bush is good at starting wars, but he has yet to win any of them, seven years in. Hopefully Iraq will turn out to be successful, and likewise with Afghanistan. Nothing would make me happier, for everyone involved. But while Iraq is looking a little better, Afghanistan is still in the pits, seven years in. And now we've got a rising Iran to show for Bush's incompetent efforts. Even Bush is now sending in his number 3 in the state department for negotiations with Iran. The one success Bush can point to is Libya's decision to halt its nuclear program. Woop dee doo. I was so terrified of Libya and their crazy leader. As you all should be, too. We must all be very afraid, because otherwise the terrorists win....

No, I won't be afraid, and neither should any of you. Fear makes people stupid, and fear is inherently un-American, the most un-American thing to be. We Americans don't get afraid of anyone, let alone of primitive cave-hiding terrorists.

How much more railing against Bin Laden must I do before I "qualify"? Perhaps you'd rather go on believing that everyone who is fed up with Bush and Cheney and their incompetence is secretly in love with terrorists, or hate Bush more than Bin Laden. By all means, go on and believe that about us, 80% of the US population that we are. Whatever gets you through the day.

Calling your litany "substantive" doesn't make it so, Matt. Likewise, I didn't say you believe Bush to be more terrible than OBL. I more simply said what I said, therein providing a certain perspective.

Oh, I see. "You said what you said." Do you have any less tautological statements to make?

Fine. You don't like my choice of words, "substantive"? Then let's call my list something else. How about I call it a "ridiculously long list of examples of gross incompetence, mismanagement, and idiocy"? Now will you address them? I notice in your recent posting that you still haven't. Nor can you explain to me a second point, namely, why, apart from fear fear fear, any of us should vote for a new president who has pledged that he will continue in most of the failed and idiotic policies of the current president.

If you want to continue to psychoanalyze and skirt my long list of points, then feel free. You're just proving one of my larger points, which is that you haven't a leg to stand on here, you have no way of defending Bush's record, and so you are instead just being diversionary. Keep it up, and just keep proving my point!

Here, perhaps enjoy some visuals and sounds, relax a bit.

Successes.
- Free elections in Iraq.
- Capture of Saddam Hussein.
- No plane hijackings of American planes.
- No repeat of 9/11 in the US.

Numerous plots against the US, planned within the US have been smashed.

I still wonder why our "friends" the Saudis are not publically helping the US track down Osama and Al Qada. Maybe they really aren't our friends?

Electing Barack HUSSEIN Obama would be like electing a man whose middle name is ADOLF during WW2.

It ain't gonna happen.

Iraq might be a success. We'll have to see. Every reasonable person is obviously hoping for success there. And the elections were inspirational.

Much of that has to do with the elimination of Bush's incompetent old guard, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Feith and Abizaid, and the bringing in of competent people like Gates and Petreus. Shame it took so many years for Bush to realize this.

But if you asked a reasonable person back in 2002 if it would be worth getting rid of Saddam at a cost of 1 trillion dollars, perhaps 2 or 3 trillion in total when all is said and done after taking into account rehabilitation for the military and the soldiers and most of which we had to borrow from China, at least four thousand American soldiers' deaths, a hundred thousand permanently wounded American soldiers, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths, and 4.5 million refugees, plus no sure sign of victory five years in, all while we are already engaged in a difficult war in Afganistan against Bin Laden and the Taliban, they'd call you crazy. A success Iraq might well turn out to be. But that doesn't change the fact that it was an idiotic idea to do it.

You will recall that after the first WTC bombing in 1993, there were no subsequent attacks for the entirety of the Clinton administration. So by your logic, Clinton was also effective in preventing terrorism on American soil? Hey, I have a rock here that keeps elephants away! I mean, do you see any elephants anywhere?

But by all means, if you have so much confidence in the Bush administration's competence to protect you from terrorism, please do feel free. Just remember that because of Bush's bungling, none of the hundreds terrorists in US custody have been charged and sent to prison, and will most likely eventually have to be released because of various violations of the judicial process. You may think the judicial process is quaint, but that's beside the point---it doesn't change the fact that the courts have consistently insisted on it so far, except for the Fourth Circuit, which has been overruled. Thanks to Bush, these bad guys are going to be free shortly.

Before 9/11, if someone said that a bunch of muslims are planning to hijack planes, murder the crew, and fly the planes into buildings with the intention of murdering tens of thousands of people, people like you would have gone into a apoplectic frenzy accusing that person of racism, bigotry, islamophobia.

If the CIA, NSA, MI5 and the Blair, Clinton and Bush administrations were not full of hubris, the 9/11 islamofascist sneak attack plot might have been thwarted, thus saving all the lives and bodies lost or damaged on 9/11 and since 9/11 and the trillions of dollars.

The most disgusting people are these 9/11 “truthers” and the FAKE “anti-war”, “peace” activists.

The 9/11 “truthers” concoct any sort of story line to rewrite, revise history – like holocaust revisionists.

The FAKE “anti-war” and “peace” activists NEVER march against islamofascism, al qada, hezbullah, infact some of them proudly say “We Are All hezbullah Now”.

The Finsbury Park mosque in London honors what they call “the magnificent 19”. I have yet to see a 9/11 revisionist or a FAKE “peace” activist deal with that.

"Al Qaeda operatives including "shoebomber" Richard Reid and Zacarias Moussaoui attended the Mosque.[3] In 2002 it was also reported that weapons training had taken place inside the building.[4]"

When British journalist Alan Johnston was kidnapped by Palestinians and threatened with death, the British press and the British Journalist Union slammed ISRAEL!

British academics engage in current day McCarthyism when they choose to boycott any applicant with a Jewish or Israeli background who is not willing to tow the British socialist line of denouncing Israel.

It’s 2008’s version of “are you now or have you ever been” a supporter of Israel?

The long term costs of getting rid of Saddam & Sons vs. the long term costs of not getting rid of Saddam & Sons cannot be compared, because there's no way to assess the latter. And that takes into account the financial costs only, forgetting the social, political, moral, regional stability, etc. costs.

One may as well talk about the exorbitant costs of WWII, the Korean War, the Cold War in general, etc. - without talking about the costs that would have been incurred if we had not fought in Korea, or against Germany during WWII. And virtually every item in your litany, Matt, could be approached much the same way.

Saddam & Sons gone, bye-bye - a very good thing.

I won't respond to Eddie's tirade about 9/11 truthers, lefty anti-American types who proudly call themselves members of Hezbollah, and such. That's totally irrelevant. It doesn't apply to me, and it doesn't address any of my arguments. It's just noise and distraction. Unless he brings up something useful or relevant, I will henceforth not respond to his comments.

Michael makes an interesting claim, that the cost of getting rid of Saddam must be compared to the cost to leaving him in power. He's right that there's no way to assess the latter. Of course, this makes the claim essentially impossible to discuss in any logical way, since no previous war is like the one with Iraq now. Maybe Saddam Hussein would have discovered the isomer bomb and destroyed the entire continent. Maybe he would have been fully marginalized and pushed out of power by his rivals. Who knows? All we know is that the track we did take is costing us trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of American casualties that will be with us for decades.

And also the fact that the US did leave him in power for thirty years up until 2003, even helping him out during the Iran-Iraq war, and all at a vastly lower total American cost and American lives than the five years we've spent getting rid of him. So although we obviously can never know what the cost would be had we left him in power, the best we can do is extrapolate based on the past, and it looks pretty cheap compared to the cost of getting rid of him.

This is all, of course, still assuming that in the end, we win the war, as I hope we will, and as it is becoming more likely that we will, especially with the new team in charge (Gates, Petreus) and the new strategies being employed.

I'm no expert on the Korean war. But everyone knows that the US never started a direct hot war with Russia during the Cold War, which would have been a catastrophic mistake that Reagan knew well to avoid. So the connection to Iraq here is tenuous. And bringing up WWII again is just a cop-out. No war was like WWII. No war comes close to the death tolls (60 million), the Holocaust (11 million), the fall of several major European countries like France, the activation of two nuclear bombs, and the _real_ fear that the bad guys could not be stopped in any way and were actually going to conquer the Earth. Americans had good reason to be afraid of the Nazi regime. Saddam Hussein and Ahmadinejad and Bin Laden and Nasrallah are mere insects compared to Hitler and Stalin, as I'm sure we can all agree. America today could squash them all like bugs in a heartbeat. Indeed, Israel could have squashed Hezbollah with ease had Israel not been concerned with civilian casualties. If Israel had just carpet bombed the southern half of Lebanon, there would be no Hezbollah anymore. Hezbollah exists solely because of Israeli humanity, a humanity that Kuntar-worshiping Hezbollah does not possess.

As for Michael's blanket comment that these arguments somehow apply to every item on my earlier list, that's nonsense. Somehow hiring "Brownie" to run FEMA doesn't seem related. Or letting Walter Reed collapse. Or Bush's opposing the new GI bill. Or his unprecedentedly manifold violations of the Constitution, which all liberals and conservatives should regard as sacrosanct, being as its the central part of the presidential oath. Or, really essentially any of the items on my "litany." Sorry, but you can't just sweep them under the rug in one fell swoop, no matter how relieved it would make you feel. I know it's agonizing dealing with cognitive dissonance, since you just _know_ Bush is the greatest president, but sorry, no dice. You must look at each item, stare at it, absorb it and its implications, and defend it. Otherwise you have not earned the right to breathe a sigh of relief about the items on the list.

The very fact that Bush has himself brought us back to the 1970s in so many ways, from stagflation and a bad economy to fuel prices to crisis with a rising and belligerent Iran and his personal embarrassing idiocy and all the other items on the list, puts him in running as worst modern president with Carter. Calling Obama (who is no bed of roses himself by the way) the next Carter is a simple act of projection, the commonest psychological defense mechanism. You just can't deal with the fact that Bush was the Republican Carter, perhaps even worse, although only perhaps considering Carter's supreme suckiness.

No Matt. The alternative historical scenario, where Saddam & Sons are left in power, isn't merely an "interesting point," it reflects the alternative costs - politically, socially, economically, morally, etc. - that would have been incurred. One can debate what those costs might have been (which does not at all mean they are "impossible to discuss"), but they can't be dismissed as a null or incomprehensible factor. Likewise, your smarm concerning the "isomer bomb" is precisely and only that, a reflection of a vacuously founded dismissiveness.

In general I haven't carried on this "exchange" because you make any sense, but rather to allow you to display and amplify your non-sense, your BDS, etc.

You still haven't addressed the items on my "litany," and so I'm beginning to believe that you simply cannot. I'm sure it is comforting to think that I, along with a healthy majority of Americans today who agree with me, are spouting "nonsense", but wishful thinking is just that.

And although you are correct to say that discussing the alternative to ousting Saddam is not impossible, you don't actually give any evidence to support your contention that it would have been anywhere near as costly to leave him in place. Nor has anybody else that I am aware of. But maybe I'm wrong: So tell me, where can I find a credible, quantitative analysis of the economic impact of leaving Saddam in place? Did RAND do a study? Has anyone done a study on this that I can look up? Or should I just take your word on faith? It's one thing to merely hypothesize that it might have been worse to avoid going into Iraq, but it's another thing altogether to show that it would be true. So instead of calling me names, why don't you give me some actual data to support your case?