The funny thing is, gobear, I never exonerated Bush or claimed that I wanted to exonerate him. All I said was that if Saddam gives up the goods Bush is gonna win, and that the Democrats are scared of that because then they’ll have no chance. If people interpreted that to mean that I suddenly reverted to supporting Bush, then that’s their problem.
However, that also doesn’t mean that I don’t like watching Democrats running around like chickens with their heads cut off in a panic.
That google search is bullshit, Airman. Those hits mainly talk about the failure to find WMDs or OBL. There is no cite for “the Democrats” denouncing Bush for not finding Hussein. You’re attacking a strawman. No “panic” will be necessary.
This has more or less happened to me (and some like-minded others) in another forum I post in which is right here. Some right-wing bastard is already spamming and slandering. Disgraceful turd.
Anyway, this war is still illegal and immoral. Yes, yes, I’m glad to see Saddam Hussein gone, but that doesn’t make it right. I have my doubts as to whether the resistance will dry up after this, as well. I suspect it won’t, but we’ll have to wait and see, I guess.
This is either misinformation or a lie. I don’t know of any Democrat who’s been beating up on Bush for not having found Saddam, except for Al Sharpton. Whether he was there or not was never the point; we always knew he was. I’m appalled that you’re using this as a hammer to spread lies about the party you oppose, just to push for your candidate’s election in next year’s presidential contest. I suppose, with Bush as vulnerable as he is, you do feel you have to resort to lieing.
Tell me: how many chickens have you counted already?
I should add that I personally denounce this arrest as illegal and I demand that Hussein be released immediately. He should also be paid reparations by the US for the murders of his sons. 
Sure, but this isn’t Chicago. We do have all the aces now, and I like our chances in a poker game.
I hear that Sadam is now out of the country (unconfirmed). If I were GWB, I’d parade him down at Gitmo for several days.
As a question Airman. Why if Saddam gave up some WMDs would the democrats have no chance? As I remember it back when we did believe that he had WMDs it was still a 50/50 thing without the UN.
Shit, DTC, it’s a good thing you used the smiley, because that sounds exactly like something you’d say seriously.
There aren’t any “goods,” Airman dream the fuck on.
Not that it would matter if there were. Ex post facto evidence cannot retroactively justify the invasion. It’s completely irrelevant what we find now.
Well,s eriously, I do wonder about the US’s jurisdiction when it comes to a trial. As much as Bush would like this trophy for himself, Hussein has not been accused of any crimes against the US and it would seem that only the Iraqi people would have any legal jurisdiction. I can’t see Bush being willing to relinquish any control to them,. though.
Chance, for about the 1,000th time, I’m not voting for Bush in 2004. Doesn’t mean I like Dean, it just means I’m not voting for Bush.
Duly noted, Airman Doors. But the question still stands: who are “all these” Democrats who have been hammering Bush about not ever being able to find Saddam Hussein? Not being able to find the weapons of mass destruction has been a point of theirs, but finding Saddam Hussein was never anything they really carped on.
Right on with not voting for Bush, though.
Why? Because with the economic recovery, the apparently known whereabouts of Osama, the capture of Saddam, and the location of WMDs, what do his opponents have to criticize him about, other than the Halliburton thing, which to this point is not a big scandal, more like a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar?
Bush will then have achieved all of his stated goals. He’ll be wildly popular, and he’ll be vindicated among most of the populace.
Doesn’t mean I’ll vote for him, but I’ll be in the minority in that case.
Thanks, Diogenes! 
My post wasn’t addressed to you, my brother, but was more my general reaction to the situation.
I was thinking The Hague, myself. That’s where Slobo ended up, chu ne?
Remember that Valerie Plame thing?
And of course somehow I don’t think that Bush has gotten his economic stated goals of 300,000 new jobs a month. They were more like 47,000.
And then there is the stated goal of the medicare bill which enjoys 19% support among seniors.
This guy has, what, half-a-dozen look-alikes who acted as decoys when he was still in power, right? How, then, do we really know this guy is the real deal?
I do remember that Valerie Plame thing. Good that you do too. Does Joe Average on the street? No.
The economy is adding jobs, not losing them. The growth is the best in 20 years. He wins, even if he doesn’t hit his numbers.
I agree the Medicare reform isn’t a very good idea. However, again, most people disagree with us. So there you have it.
I suppose they could compare his DNA to the DNA of his son’s bodies.
Well, don’t hold back. Share, please!