Gonna go out on a limb here....

[Domineaux]

all the points have been hashed and rehashed so it is time to agree to disagree and move on.

Not really as you have skipped completely over many relevant points that don't match up with your view.

 

[texas skeeter]

Why is it that neocons are so quick to dismiss the shit Bush pulled that makes Obama's pale in comparison? Why do they want to give Dubya a pass on everything and hold a microscope to Obama?

It's funny with the continuing "Blame Bush" mentality of yours!! It's even more funny YOU ASS-UME I didnt blame/bash Bush for the mistakes he made. And I darn sure DID'NT BLAME Clinton when Bush F'd up!! Right now I hold "THIS" administration accountable for its STUPID actions as i did BUSHES when they F'd up!! and right now it's O'KNUCKLEHEADS fault these guns walked and innocent people died!! Just to recap I've held both Admin's to blame as "You" OBVIOUSLY won't or can't do........Yeah Yeah we know, Blame Bush yet again!!!! You Libs are SOOOOOOOO predictable!!!

 

[Whiskey_Rocka_Rolla]

If I'm forced to choose between Democrat and Republican the choice is obvious

But just to be clear here I am all for the Republican party, and always have been (since the I was born anyway). I'll agree that there are some Reps that are crapping all over the image and values of the Republican party, and there is definitely alot of house cleaning to do. I could be wrong here but I'd say O is a President gone haywire with his executive powers.

Romney is no angel by any means but I think he'd get away with alot less. In part because the gov't has now, at this point, pretty much drawn the attention to the bulk of the U.S. population, and the people have lost trust in the gov as a whole. Both parties. Another reason being that he would be on his first term.

And also, people can bash Rand Paul all they want, but I don't think he was wrong for endorsing Romney. Sure his dad is the Libertarian of all Libertarian, and that is truly the best ideology to have, but realistically, in today's world, people just can not grasp that concept, not enough to completely go from point Z back to Point A, it will surely take baby steps to right all of the wrongs committed by our government in the last several administrations. Generally speaking.

Just the fact that we have a "First Lady" who has this to say about the American flag:

Michelle Obama's "All this for a damn flag" shown at three different speeds - YouTube

Now I'm no professional lipreader here, but professional lip-readers have in fact analyzed this video and confirmed she said, "All this for a damn flag".

 

[itchin]

They weren't reading lips when she said, "for the first time, in my adult life, I am proud of my country."

Michelle Obama: First Time proud of USA - YouTube

 

[M. Sage]

I do respect your opinion on the military draft although sometimes it is necessary. It is not Rush's draft-dodging that bothers me as much as his denial and holier-than-thou posturing when he is rambling on about defending the Constitution now when he refused to defend it when he was called. And, even though I did not support John Kerry, I really had a problem with Rush questioning Kerry's Navy service in the Vietnam War during the 2004 election campaign...that was an insult to anyone who served during that war and he has not earned the right to question anyone's military service.

Where is compulsory military service in the Constitution? And is joining the military the only way (or even a good way) to defend the Constitution? I know several people who I'd bet have done more in defense of the Constitution than anybody on this site, but only a couple of them have ever put on a uniform.

The "but Bush!" is getting really old. Bush isn't in office, you know... Can we focus on the current criminal? FWIW, you're being a bit hypocritcal criticizing Bush for the lies (or errors? Kind of unclear) that lead to Iraq but not saying a damn thing about Obama sending troops and planes in to topple Khadaffi simply because Europe wanted cheap oil.

BTW, KIA in Iraq ended up under 4500, and almost a thousand of those were "non-hostile" casualties. Just so you can correct your claim of 4800. http://www.defense.gov/news/casualty.pdf

 

[Domineaux]

The point is not about Bush, it is about Republican hypocrisy. Good people die every day due to bad decisions made in good faith...However, speaking about Bush, how do you reconcile the 4,800 brave young American men and women KIA in Iraq because of a bad decision by Bush based on lies from underlings? Who was held accountable for that mess? Do you really want to go there?

Funny how only Bush and his underlings receive credit for them "damn lies" about WMD's in Iraq that led to our military getting involved:

Transcript President Clinton explains Iraq strike 1998 - CNN
Earlier today, I ordered Americas armed forces to strikemilitary and security targets in Iraq. They are joined byBritish forces. Their mission is to attack Iraqs nuclear,chemical and biological weapons programs and its militarycapacity to threaten its neighbors.
Their purpose is to protect the national interest of theUnited States, and indeed the interests of people throughout theMiddle East and around the world.
Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighborsor the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biologicalweapons.

Many more quote at snopes.com: Weapons of Mass Destruction Quotes