The OFFICIAL I love W. thread!

I have to wonder about the depth and maturity of a person who loves how angry other people get. You must be very proud of your allegiance to a president whom a senior editor of "The National Review," the archetypal conservative publication, has called the worst president in American history.

WORST. PRESIDENT. EVER.

Yeah some people actually care about brave americans dying in Iraq for nothing.

Sadaam was such a great guy.

Let's give ourselves back to the British!

The REAL John Lintz wrote:

Sadaam was such a great guy.

Yes and the situation now is so much better!!!

Why I love W.

I make $55k and my federal taxes are lower because W radically increased the child income tax deduction - greatly helping the middle class rather than just talking about it like the democrats do.

I like his appointees Roberts and Alito on the Supreme Court.

Sure, war sucks, but I like that the war is over there and not here. My boss, my landlord, and another good friend have had guard or reserve assignments recently in the middle east and all of them feel our military is making progress. My landlord, a guard combat chopper pilot, just volunteered for an assignment in Pakistan.

Not that any president has much to do with it, but inflation is low, unemployment is low, and home loans are affordable.

They are absolutely not dying for nothing. Whether you agree with being in Iraq, whether or not you think we should have gone in the first place you cant make that assertion. Without Americans in Iraq there would be an all out war there, no politician left or right disagrees with that. An ex-adviser to Hillary told NPR last week that Hillary, even if she serves 2 terms in the white house, there will still be troops in Iraq when she leaves. The same goes for Obama. No matter who wins the next election there will still be 10s of thousands of US troops in Iraq for the next decade.

Wawawiwa wrote:

They are absolutely not dying for nothing. Whether you agree with being in Iraq, whether or not you think we should have gone in the first place you cant make that assertion. Without Americans in Iraq there would be an all out war there, no politician left or right disagrees with that.

who created that war?

if bush had said from the get-go that he was just going to kill a mad dictator, and had made good plans to try to stabalize the situation after saddam's fall, i'd be perfectly fine with it.

however, he lied, and everyone in his administration has their head so far up their asses that they don't know what the f*** to do now. but they use the killing going on over there as an excuse to perpetuate a no-win situation. and we should all just "support the troops" and keep our mouths shut because to do otherwise is unpatriotic.

did you hear cheney is trying to say the office of the VP is not part of the executive branch? i mean--how far is this f***ing shit going to go? how stupid are you people who can still support this?

First, with no invasion there would be no war, sure Sadamm would be killing people like people are now killed by the opposite sect.So then there is an all out war...i would take the troops and use them to end that crap in Darfur first, easier job and a chance that these people really want our help.People don't get it, the majority of ordinary Iraqis think it's ok to kill an american soldier...well if these crazy people want to kill each other, go ahead!

The REAL John Lintz wrote:

Sadaam was such a great guy.

That is a tired argument that holds no weight. If the United States practiced a policy of deposing any leader who murders his own people we would have invade countries all over the world. So tell me when we are going to invade the Democratic Republic of Congo? Also, the conservatives weren't such big fans of this theory when we went into the Balkans.

John Stockton wrote:

i would take the troops and use them to end that crap in Darfur first, easier job and a chance that these people really want our help.

Wow, just, wow.

Thats Real wrote:

John Stockton wrote:

i would take the troops and use them to end that crap in Darfur first, easier job and a chance that these people really want our help.

Wow, just, wow.

I understand exactly what "That's Real" means when he says wow. Military force should not be used in Darfur. People complain that our involvement in Iraq has hurt our reputation in the Muslim world, what do they think will happen if we send our soldiers to Darfur? Additionally, there is no way to say that that would be any easier. Look how difficult it was in Somalia. Finally, why should the United States be the country to intervene? It was a British colony, maybe they should fix the problem caused by their imperial actions. If they need any help, they can look to France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, and the other European countries that carved up Africa at the 1884 Berlin Conference.

Without "W" it is difficult to say #43 is the WORST ever.

"Without Americans in Iraq there would be an all out war there, no politician left or right disagrees with that."

There was a war there before we got there?

The REAL John Lintz wrote:

Sadaam was such a great guy.

At least he knew how to keep a lid on those Islamist terrorists, which is a lot more than can be said about the US occupiers.

President Bush got 25%, down from 33% last year. But TV news, newspapers, the criminal justice system, labor unions, big business, and HMOs all scored lower than our commander in chief.

At rock bottom of the 16 entities polled was the freshly elected, Democratic-controlled Congress. Its dismal 14% confidence rating is the lowest since Gallup began these annual surveys in 1973, and down significantly from the 19% the Republican Congress scored with the public in a "throw the bums out" mood last year.

http://tinyurl.com/3afrg3

WXYZ wrote:

Why I love W.

I make $55k and my federal taxes are lower because W radically increased the child income tax deduction - greatly helping the middle class rather than just talking about it like the democrats do.

Of course, when the "off budget" expenditures for Iraq hit the fan, what ever little bit you saved, you, and your kids, and grandkids, will be paying back in spades.

BTW, what part of conservatism even condones a tax break for having children? If a poor mother has a kid, and gets more govt money for it, its bad policy, but if a middle class family has a kid and gets more money, its OK? WTF?

I am simply astounded by people who do not understand that the level instability in Iraq is solely due to our invasion.