Well, you don’t even have to wait for it. He proves how miserable he is with every comment.

Watch!
You can see the credibility of the right finially dissolve into nothingness!

…wait for it…

Here it is:

” Bush didn’t invade, Congress did”

high-lair-EE-ous

There it is! A shining example of colossal ignorance, hatred for his own country and excusing Washington liberals wrapped up in a nice turd wasting space on the GP blog.

PUH-thetic!

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a6f9TlJgBdUU&refer=worldwide

Makes you wonder how stupid and ineffectual our own CIC is when a nation that is threatened with Iranian extermination is taking care of its business in a tried-and-true way while bolstering its own defense of freedom.

Libtards, you OWN this president. Everything that happens from now on is squarely on your heads.

Regards,
Peter H.

” Bush didn’t invade, Congress did”

No, littleletterpeoplegillie, as CinC, President Bush lead the invasion of Iraq which was carefully authorized by Congress. You can look it up. And while you are there, check out how many Democrat Senators voted for the authorization. (John Kerry, however, voted against the war before he voted for it or vice versa or some such clear as mud, convoluted psychobabble.)

littleletterpeoplegillie, you are the one trying to foist off the rogue president and his dictator’s grip on the military. You sure sell your team of Congressmen short if they let ChimpHitlerBushMonkeyTooStupidToBreathe walk all over them in plain daylight.

How well I remember Clinton and Senator Clinton and Albright and Tenent and Holbrooke and all the MSM and the Democrat lions of the Senate screaming to stop the invasion. “Don’t do it!” Wow, it will ring in my ears forever.

Of course, Senator Obama did vote against the war. He was a Senator in the Senate of the State of Illinois, which never had a vote on the Iraq War, but, hey, he would have voted against it if he had been in the US Senate.

You can look his vote up. It is filed right next to his birth certificate.

Don’t forget, the official policy of the Obama administration is now ‘Who cares about Tibet?’

Mark Steyn has a great story about his wife related to that. They were at a BBQ and some loser there had one of those bumper stickers on his car that said “Free Tibet.” Steyn’s wife actually asked the guy, “So, what exactly are you doing to free Tibet?” Awkward silence. “Seriously. What are you doing for Tibet? I understand they’re not free.” As the guy is trying to mingle and get away from her, she says, “You’re not really doing ANYTHING for Tibet, are you!?” She sounds hilarious, just like her husband.

“Attorney General Eric Holder said Wednesday the Guantanamo detention center is a well-run, professional facility that will be difficult to close — but he’s still going to do it. Holder visited the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, on Monday and spoke to reporters about his trip during a news conference Wednesday. Closing Guantanamo, he said, ‘will not be an easy process. It’s one we will do in a way that ensures that people are treated fairly and that the American people are kept safe.’”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090225/ap_on_go_ot/holder_guantanamo

There it is in a nut shell folks. The liberal mindset. Close “well-run, professional facilities” to make room for dozens of new, poorly-run, unprofessional bureaucracies. Destroy, demonize, and burn-down what works. Promote, praise, and subsidize what doesn’t. Well-run, professional Gitmo–GONE. Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac–HERE TO STAY.

Thanks to michael More and Jimmy carter, Democrats can claim they want to “Free Tibet,” but given some of the commenters here: They will do nothing to actually, you know, Free Tibet.

…wait for it…

Here it is:

” Bush didn’t invade, Congress did”

high-lair-EE-ous

BUSH INVADED A COUNTRY WITH NO PROVOCATION THAT WE HAVE OCCUPIED FOR GOING ON SEVEN YEARS TO NO STRATEGIC BENEFIT.

What a pathetic misstatement of reality. Yes, I’ll swat it once more. Why not? Our troops deserve no less.

- Bush didn’t invade, Congress did. That is: yes, Congress authorized the invasion.
- There was plenty of provocation. Tons of it. Saddam committed numerous acts of aggression against his neighbors, the U.S. specifically, and the United Nations (when he wasn’t bribing them).
- There was/is enormous strategic benefit to removing Saddam Hussein and to establishing a functioning democracy in the heart of the Arab world. Obama and the Democrats can always throw it away, of course. They probably want to throw it away, in their hearts. Maybe they will. But that won’t be Bush’s fault.

How sad.

I cant believe libtards are still arguing about Iraq. The war is won, Iraq has just re-emphasized their commitment to democracy and nationalism over sectarianism, and Barack Obama has adopted ALL the policies leftists have been demanding Bush’s head over.

In other words Bush won, you lost. Eat it.

BUSH INVADED A COUNTRY WITH NO PROVOCATION THAT WE HAVE OCCUPIED FOR GOING ON SEVEN YEARS TO NO STRATEGIC BENEFIT.

H-m-m-m-m. Wasn’t there a lot of UN appearance and palaver before Congress voted to authorize the Bush invasion of Iraq? It appears that Levi is damning the UN and the Congress for authorizing Bush to do what he said he would do.

Where is the War Powers Resolution Act in all of this? Congress has had the power to pull the troops out of Iraq since after the first six months point following the invasion. Levi credits Bush with a dictator’s power.

I asked Levi to enlighten us about Obama’s decision to bomb the sovereign territory of Pakistan without the permission of Pakistan. Levi responds with a non sequitur about rubber and glue. Shall the Obama people bomb Mexico to kill the growing drug cartel? Is there any “(Obama) administration…. violat(ion) all sorts of international laws and treaties that we’re signatories to by implementing these widespread arcane…(bombing)… policies(?)”

Levi asks me in #21 what weight I give to the Clinton administration for the responsibility of the invasion of Iraq. The relevant point is probably best seen by how Obama has proceeded in Afghanistan. Using the Bush Secretary of Defense and the CIA, NSA, NSC, foreign intelligence services, etc. that have been advising Bush for the past eight years, Obama has been “brought up to speed” in the infancy of his administration. It will be several years before Obama will have “his people” in place. But even then, he will rely on an intelligence community and assessment team that will not differ much from what the Bush administration knew and acted on.

This idea that a rogue George Bush overcame the checks and balances of government and duped Congress and the world into a war of revenge and ego boosterism is juvenile at best.

Levi, you appear to care not a whit about the state of Israel. Shall Iran nuke the Jews or otherwise destroy them with impunity? Radical Islam has a particularly fundamental view of Jews. Ask Daniel Pearl’s widow.

I’ve got to stop at Home Depot and get a baby fridge. I’ll see if they sell goalpost wheels.

Short answer: no, he won’t. He’ll go on and on and on about how Obama can’t be held responsible, how Obama’s decision to support and endorse these means nothing, anything to defend the fact that he’s a complete and total hypocrite.

Take your time when you get back from work.

Real quick before I got to go to work, but the Bush administration has violated all sorts of international laws and treaties that we’re signatories to by implementing these widespread arcane torture policies. If you really gave two squirts about international law, you’d be calling for Bush’s imprisonment, at a minimum.

Please list just one international law and/or treaty to which we are “signatories” (sic) which we have violated in regard to “arcane torture policies.”

Forget the “policy” part. What arcane torture have we engaged in and what international law and or/treaty have we violated? Since you are talking legalese and International Court stuff here, I suspect you have enough in the way of specifics of getting the ball rolling.

I will be particularly interested in your understanding of “rendition” and “terrorists” or unaligned enemy combatants vis a vis the Geneva Accords.

You make a mighty charge about arcane torture policies, now back it up, please.

For those just joining us, here’s the recap.

Levi: There were no WMD or Terrorists in Iraq, none, zip, zero nada.

Me: Kindly points Levi to links showing that, yes there were.

Levi: What? You expect me to read?

Me: Yes

Levi: Well I’m not gonna! Besides there weren’t enough! And and and, that evil Bush lied us into war!

Me: Bill Clinton stated and signed that regime change was the stated goal of the US. No matter what you believe, he was just following the directives of the previous adminstration.

Levi: LALALALAALAICAN’THEARYOULALALALALALALALALA!

And in the bonus round…
Levi: Because you supported invading Iraq, you’re all Bushbot zombies.
Me: Using that logic, you must be a terrorist supporter who advocates the hanging of gays. After all, Iraq and the Taliban have also condemned the liberation of Iraq.
Levi: I can’t refute that, it would undermind my own arguement, so I’ll ignore it.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled blog.

Levi, if you do support Democracy Overseas, how do you deal with folks like Mugabe or Assad? I’d like to hear how you spread democracy without using President Bush’s method.

Or do you not care about the populations living within those countries?

Real quick before I got to go to work, but the Bush administration has violated all sorts of international laws and treaties that we’re signatories to by implementing these widespread arcane torture policies. If you really gave two squirts about international law, you’d be calling for Bush’s imprisonment, at a minimum.

And why is it that you choose to attack us a members of a “Bush cult” in a post which focuses not on his foreign policy but that of his successor. Does that make you a member of a Bush-hating cult?

You’ve just confirmed that you were reffering to George Bush’s foreign policy when you invoked ‘the right thing to do,’ so don’t pretend like you weren’t talking about him. That might be an established orthodoxy around here and in conservative circles, but it’s an assertion that I will always take issue with.

And yeah, the Iraq war is the line in the sand for me. You can talk all you want about how much you were disappointed by Bush or how much you criticized him, but I consider you a Bush-person if you’re still with him on his moronic war.