Megacool Blog indeed!… if anyone else has anything it would be much appreciated. Great website Enjoy!…

“Well look, first of all, they, resources were sent as they were needed, but I would remind you this, President Obama is in no position whatsoever to criticize what President Bush did. Because in 2007, President Obama, then a member of the United States Senate, voted against war funding for Iraq and Afghanistan. If this was so vital, then why did he not speak out? He was chairman of a committee overseeing NATO. He could have easily called a hearing to say, ‘I’m concerned about this issue.’ He did not.”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2009/12/01/rove-fires-back-lauer-charge-bush-administration-took-its-eye-ball

Why don’t you do it?

You’re the one w/ the questions, go out onto the I-net and find your own answers! They’re there – if you can accept them.

And BTW, here’s a question for you, via K Rove: While he was in the Senate, just what was Obama doing to ensure a quick and easy victory in Afghanistan?

Wait, wait, wait..now, hurry up!

But then that is every Army in history. “Hurry up and Wait” is taught in year two of ROTC. Bush did it.

—
Remember: If you must Feed the Trolls feed them to the alligators

On December 1st, 2009 at 10:40 pm, Blackstone said: #849905

Disagree with Bush’s actions all you want, but at least he had something to show for it. What’s Zero’s excuse?

It is not about agreeing or disagreeing with Pres Bush, it is about taking VP to task for his assertions.

VP Cheney is taking Pres Obama to task over taking so long to make a decision on Afghanista. Well, I would like to know why did it seven years for his administration to do what what was done in Afghanistan.

And, what does VP Cheney have to show for our seven years in Afghanistan? We are still there. Following VP Cheney’s blueprint, would that mean we could still be there for another seven years? He had 2,550 days and Pres Obama has had 340 days. How does he explain that?

Yep, you can agree or disagree, but I would like to hear more of VP Cheney’s story as he takes Pres Obama to task.

On December 1st, 2009 at 9:16 pm, zyzzyg said:

You raised the issue of Iraq. And, while you are thinking about an answer, know that the world was on side and supportive of our going into Afghanistan but was reluctant about supporting us going into Iraq.

Would you mind explaining what this has to do with anything? If you’re still all bent out of shape over liberating Iraq, take it up with the current VP and SecState, both of whom voted for the Iraq war as Senators. This kind of “b-b-b-but BUSH” does nothing to excuse Obama’s pathetic behavior on Afghanistan. Bush was busy winning a war in Iraq (and still managed to keep Afghanistan under better control than it is now). Obama’s busy fighting a war on Fox News (and losing).

Disagree with Bush’s actions all you want, but at least he had something to show for it. What’s Zero’s excuse?

Many others answered your ridiculous questions and I concur with their assessment.

You are welcome to change the subject, but you have yet to address the questions from post #849819

You must be a liberal. They like to skip over things that don’t meet their preconcieved view. Or maybe you just missed it. I answered here:

On December 1st, 2009 at 9:17 pm, T-Bone said:
The poster ditto others posts. It’s a no brainer except to those who must perpetuate the Bush is a bad man mentality to make them feel rightous since they believed the Democrat propaganda being spewed by various Democratic leaders, including Obama, who was against the surge before he was for it. It’s hard to come to grips with the fact they were simply wrong.

On December 1st, 2009 at 9:21 pm, T-Bone said:
but was reluctant about supporting us going into Iraq.
Wrong! See, theres the problem, they can’t accpt the truth at face value. The UN authorized military intervention in Iraq. It had a little something to do with 17 unheeded UN resolutions. What was that last one? UN 1441 or something like that.

Absolutely! Obie speaks of a coalition in Afghanistan like it was his idea and totally ignores the fact that there was a huge coalition of forces in Iraq. It was NOT Bush’s war, it was the UN’s war.

I watched the speech and can’t believe he can tell lie after lie with such a straight face, knowing we do have darn good memories of how Iraq went down.

And he ignored the fact that HE diverted funds for the troops recently to help build a Ted Kennedy memorial and that congress over the years has put ridiculous ROE’s into place that have caused so many of our troops to be killed in Afghanistan.

Obama is a disgrace.

On December 1st, 2009 at 9:21 pm, T-Bone said: #849866

Wrong! See, theres the problem, they can’t accpt the truth at face value. The UN authorized military intervention in Iraq. It had a little something to do with 17 unheeded UN resolutions. What was that last one? UN 1441 or something like that.

There is doing the right thing for the wrong reason, doing the right thing for the right reason, doing the wrong thing for the right reason, and the doing the wrong thing for the wrong thing.

I prefer doing the right thing for the right reason. Going into Iraq was the doing the right thing for the wrong reason. Yes, go into Iraq, but don’t say it is being done because of 9/11, that was the wrong reason.

Yep, Iraq was a bad actor and we had them on lock down. Think of the no fly zones.

You are welcome to change the subject, but you have yet to address the questions from post #849819

Yep, and they are still fighting. But, are they winning? Why has it taken seven years?

Address the dithering and lost focus of the past seven years.

Talk all you want about Iraq, but when is VP Cheney going to be taken to task over the decisions of his administration?

On December 1st, 2009 at 9:21 pm, T-Bone said: #849866

Wrong! See, theres the problem, they can’t accpt the truth at face value. The UN authorized military intervention in Iraq. It had a little something to do with 17 unheeded UN resolutions. What was that last one? UN 1441 or something like that.

There is doing the right thing for the wrong reason, doing the right thing for the right reason, doing the wrong thing for the right reason, and the doing the wrong thing for the wrong thing.

I prefer doing the right thing for the right reason. Going into Iraq was the doing the right thing for the wrong reason. Yes, go into Iraq, but don’t say it is being done because of 9/11, that was the wrong reason.

Yep, Iraq was a bad actor and we had them on lock down. Think of the no fly zones.

You are welcome to change the subject, but you have yet to address the questions from post #849819

Yep, and they are still fighting. But, are they winning? Why has it taken seven years?

Address the dithering and lost focus of the past seven years.

Talk all you want about Iraq, but when is VP Cheney going to be taken to task over the decisions of his administration?

Allowing Islamic terrorists to flourish is not good for any country in the world. (and that includes Islamic countries)

We need to change the dynamic that its ok for jihadis to kill non believers. Its still prevalent in the teachings of Imams in mosques all over the world including right here in the US.

On December 1st, 2009 at 9:21 pm, AlohaGuy said:

It’s hard to come to grips with the fact they were simply wrong.

It’s also hard for them to discover their fearless leader lied to them to get elected. Today it’s officially Obama’s war. And they already gave him a Peace Prize.

And why shouldn’t it be his war? The left always said it was the one that should be fought, until a clueless nitwit was elected, and the left suddenly decided they weren’t serious about what they were spouting.

Hence, the dithering by said nitwit.

…and his continued undermining in every manner possible other battles against terrorists.

On December 1st, 2009 at 8:44 pm, DBNinKY said:

Address the dithering and lost focus of the past seven years.

Karl Rove already did, and quite nicely; jump over to NewsBusters and read the entire exchange.

Binky….uh….linky…please.