Considering we all are in agreement on point 2, - that is Republicans did start preparing for war right after 9-11, - the point of contention must be point… very good, NurseC, point 1 (one). Therefore we must now concentrate on point 1 (one).
So what’s wrong with advocating indict-ments (thankyou, HtB), therapy and understanding for terrorists and why is it not sufficient to solve the problem of Terrorism?
Yes. There’s so little diffeence between “I hate Republicans” and “What’s for breakfast” that just this morning I said “I hate Republicans” at the diner to find out what the special was. Perhaps if he had said “I ate Republicans”, you might have a point…
hey twit - you forgot to prove that “indict-ments, therapy and understanding” was what liberals proposed to do, and ignored the suggestion posted above that since the Afghan invasion was overwhelmingly approved by both partiies that it was perhaps not only the repubs planning it.
(While you’re talking republican plans for wars, you might want to touch on why the Iraq invasion was so fuckingly poorly planned, ok?)
You too? Wow, we have something in common. 
Liberal chiming in…
Immediately after 9/11, I was screaming for vengeance along wih my red-state brethren. I think we all agreed that direct military action was warranted against the country which was actively supporting and shielding the perpetrators of that crime.
That would be (as Karl Rove knows), Afghanistan.
Once again, lest people come to their senses, the White House is trying to conflate Iraq and 9/11 as well as to sow additional partisan diviseness. Unfortunately (again, as Karl Rove Knew), the rose to the bait and reacted with shrill indignation which will help drive home the meme that anyone who is against this administration can simply be dismissed as an ineffectual whiner.
And it works!!:
It’s not about issues, it’s just a freaking popularity contest now.
New Iskander, it appears you have negleted your homework.
Did you see any Democratic votes against military action in Afghanistan?
Did you see the Democrats rebut Bush’s address to the joint session of Congress Sept. 20, 2001?
Did you prove the Democrats didn’t prepare for war right after 9-11?
Did you prove that Bush didn’t have a hard on for Iraq right after 9-11?
The last one is pretty tricky. You have to prove a negative. You might remember where I learned that trick from.
Rove is a genius. He trots out a few facts and Democrats go ballistic, making themselves look insane and destroying their credibility. Stoid engages in [del]the left’s customary noble rhetoric that is sure to change minds[/del] scatalogical speech that leaves me amazed that a person filled with such bile can live with herself.
Two congressional elections with Democrats losing their majorities, two presidential elections lost, and you think Republicans will be out of power for a generation??? Whatever Veb and the rest of you liberals are smoking, dude, tell me where I can get some, 'cause whatever can divorce you from reality so well is really powerful shit!
On The Al Franken Show yesterday, they played a tape of president Bush, shortly after 9/11/2001, proclaiming that he intended to get indictments for those responsible. So, I guess Mr. Bush is a liberal.
When everything turns to shit, people tend to get voted out of office quick.
Here’s what the Republican Party has come to stand for under George Bush:
You control both houses of Congress and the Presidency. Which means that all of this crap is YOUR FAULT. You’ve got a year and a half to fix it, or your asses are HISTORY.
Let’s hope not. We need an honest conservative party like a car needs brakes. Lets hope they root out these flaming buttmunchkins and give us the honest opposition a democratic republic needs.
Now, Universe, I know I haven’t been a very good pantheist…
Why do I need to prove anything? I simply asked what’s wrong with “indictments, therapy and understanding”, to which the answer of course is absolutely nothing. So why are you so scared of the charge?
Scared? pul-eeze.
show it happened except in you mind.
Give it up, wring, you are up against a master of rhetorical jiu-jitsu, you’re clearly outmatched by the raw power of his intellect…
(shhhh. I know, I know, but maybe now he’ll go away…)
Damn…I almost have to feel sorry for the poor bastard.
He knows he messed up. He knows a lot of it is his damn fault. He’s gotta know that he made far too many trips to the well with that paint-the-opposition-as-lunatics nonsense, especially since it’s plainly obvious that things are going to hell in Iraq no matter what anyone says about it. Worst, he’s sold his soul so completely to this doomed cause that he can’t even save himself.
Anyway, to answer the OP…what’s there to be said? The war he was so in favor of has gone completely south, and there’s absolutely no way to weasel out of this. He’s desperate. He’s doing anything, ANYTHING he can to stop the bleeding. And it’s not much different for the rest of the administration. This is all plain to see. There’s not much to argue.
I’m not taking joy in this man’s collapse. Too little, too late. What will make me happy is when our troops stop dying and our money stops being squandered for this hopeless war. Nothing else. (Well, I’d also like the oil to start flowing again, because, hey, let’s not kid ourselves, we need it, but first things first.)
Well, you know, technically, its not actually our oil. Technically.
But be that as it may, I don’t think Rove really had any input into the war decision. He’s a whore, not a strategist. If the plan had been for GeeDubya to fly to Baghdad and surrender Florida to Saddam after giving him a knob job on Al Jazz…
Rove would have been out there spinning it as brilliant, courageous, and manly.
And snide imputations. But don’t worry about those.