That is exactly what already happened in Vietnam. Nobody wanted to admit it was an unwinnable disaster and a total waste of lives for no reason. Nobody wanted to be the one to pull out. The only one who did have the nerve to get us out was Nixon. He was right. I might almost see voting for an incompetent, if you viewed him as being less incompetent than the other incompetent, but deliberately voting for someone you know is evil? You’d rather throw away more lives than admit a mistake and cut your losses? Ohhhh I wish this was the Pit right now.
Reading some of the posts here, it’s obvious he is not the only one that feels that way. I’m willing to bet Allah talks to OBL and his followers in similar fashion.
Beyond ironic that it eludes both camps, for they’ve become one. Frothing at the mouth barbarians, backed by their respective gods, only too willing to go at each other’s throats.
Indeed, we’ve learned nothing from history.
PS-Cite for above quote: Bush: On A Mission From God
Well, Bush has certainly made me more religious. I find myself saying, “Please God, don’t make us endure another 4 years of this!” 
That is exactly the gist of it.
The neocons are not so much conservatives as liberal entryists.
It’s not enough that they want the fed’ral gov’ment to be the answer to our problems, neocons want the fed’ral gov’ment to solve the World’s problems. Which, IMHO, is at minimum, five times as fucked up as thinking that larger fed’ral gov’ment can solve the US’s problems.
Larger government is the problem.
But what can one expect from “big-government conservatives”.
:spit:
Think about it, “the most liberal senator” was clobbering a GOP Prez because the Prez spent too much money on discretionary spending. It is absolutely a shameful disgrace that my Republican PotUSA is farther left of the “most liberal senator” in the senate.
:spit:
I have congenital conservatism syndrome and these sort of folk only serve to aggravate my underlying, anti-gubmint disposition.
Of course, part of the problem there is that “the most liberal senator” label is bogus. It is based on the bias that occurs when you don’t count the votes a senator didn’t vote on and look in a year when this senator is out running for President and is thus only coming back for important close votes that the Democrats think they really need him on. If you use the same algorithm over a longer period of time, you don’t get him being even particularly nearly the most liberal.
Almost assuredly, Bush will use the “most liberal Senator” accusation in Wednesday’s debate. Here is what I would propose as a response:
“Not many would claim that I am the most liberal Senator, but in the theory that it takes one to know one, the President may be right, considering he is the most fiscally liberal President since FDR.”
It has the added bonus of reminding true conservatives that Bush isn’t one of them.