Bush Wanted War, BUT!!

bradly wrote:
Good post, Jeff

"By the way, thank you for your service. I think it’s great that you can take time out to post here, while you’re serving in Iraq.

A lot of the guys who cheelead for the war don’t actually have the guts to back up their war rhetoric with action. You know the type- all talk and no action. Some people call them Chickenhawks, or to be more specific, Yellow-Bellied Elephants if they are Republican.

I really respect that you are not one of those guys just shooting their mouths off, with nothing to back it up."

Does homeland security count?

Oh, what about you? Bad mouthing the effort at every turn.

What good do you do for anyone?

Seriously?

You don’t win elections. You have nothing but criticism to offer. Nothing constructive in any way shape or form.

Soldiers are fighting tooth and nail and you are masturbating to the idea that Bush had the audacity to mispronounce a word.

You are the soft underbelly of the war effort.

You are who the enemy cheers when you parrot their talking points.

You are dedicated to our failure.

You are a pus pimple.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
bradly wrote:
Good post, Jeff

"By the way, thank you for your service. I think it’s great that you can take time out to post here, while you’re serving in Iraq.

A lot of the guys who cheelead for the war don’t actually have the guts to back up their war rhetoric with action. You know the type- all talk and no action. Some people call them Chickenhawks, or to be more specific, Yellow-Bellied Elephants if they are Republican.

I really respect that you are not one of those guys just shooting their mouths off, with nothing to back it up."

Does homeland security count?

Oh, what about you? Bad mouthing the effort at every turn.

What good do you do for anyone?

Seriously?

You don’t win elections. You have nothing but criticism to offer. Nothing constructive in any way shape or form.

Soldiers are fighting tooth and nail and you are masturbating to the idea that Bush had the audacity to mispronounce a word.

You are the soft underbelly of the war effort.

You are who the enemy cheers when you parrot their talking points.

You are dedicated to our failure.

You are a pus pimple.

JeffR
[/quote]

Uh…but are you serving?

Jeff is Special Forces or Green Beret, can’t remember which one.

He only posts here when he’s not bagging Iraqi terrorists and locating stockpiles of WMDs.

oops, nevermind…

[quote]JJJJ wrote:
mazilla wrote:
when you are in that position you cannot be “just wrong”. when you hold the lives of soo many in your hands it’s imperative that you be 110% right, period. what kind of leader falls on the defense that he was wrong? oops sorry i was wrong, well now your loved ones are dead, as well as the loved ones of all those who oppossed us.

MAZILLA . . . since you’ve apparently never been in charge of anything larger than say, a circle-jerk, you obviously don’t understand that LEADERS ARE WRONG ALL OF THE TIME . . . IF NOT MOST OF THE TIME. It’s the ending that counts, and this one isn’t over.

And the point of fact is, that if Bush was wrong about Iraq, then so were most leaders of European coutries. So were advisors in the White House. So was much of the CIA, the Department of Defense and the Department of State. So were most foreign intelligence agencies. So were most foreign governments. So were most foreign militaries. So was the United Nations. So were various non-governmental organizations. And so WERE MANY IN THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT AND MILITARY INCLUDING SOME OF SADDAM’S KEY LEADERS.

The fact is that Hussein ran a masterful disinformation plan for who-the-fuck-knows what reason. He was too smart for his own good.

And by the way: Many believe that until our experts are able to look under every rock in the Bakaa Valley, and get inside the Syrian government, we’re never going to know EXACTLY what the truth was about the WMDs.

And it doesn’t matter anyway. In case you missed it, a bunch of assholes attacked us on 911.

New rules!

Following 911, any country who even SMELLS like they’re going to attack us is going to get shit-hammered.

Saddam Hussein CLAIMED HE HAD WMDs. He was regulalrly shooting missiles at US airplanes. He circumvented all attemnpts to economically blockade him. He had BILLIONS of dollars that he could spend as he wished. He had bribed senior members of the United Nations and several European nations. He was giving money to suicide bombers in Palestine. He had embassies and a massive intelligence agency operating around the world. HE HAD USED WMDs AND HAD ALREADY FOUGHT A MAJOR WAR AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.

Under the new rules of 912, that all made him a dangerous character.

If you don’t understand all that . . . well, then, I guess it’s a good thing that you’re just a body builder/weight lifter and not in charge of running the country like the President, huh?
[/quote]

Big fucking deal. There’s a million threats to the US, two of which are Iran and North Korea, and both are far more dangerous than Iraq ever has been.

Your post sounds nice, too bad its all bullshit. If they always had WMDs, then how come we’re trying to spread democracy now? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again- you can’t change the basis for a war once you start it. This administration has done it a million times.

No WMDs, no links to Al-Quieda, no Bin Laden, paying for news stories, a coming civil war, screened presidential audiences for “town halls”, a visible contempt for those who question his policies, the PATRIOT Act, a pussy Democratic party who won’t stand up, much less stand together…Yea its been a great time since 9/11. I’m real proud of America right now.

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
Jeff is Special Forces or Green Beret, can’t remember which one.

He only posts here when he’s not bagging Iraqi terrorists and locating stockpiles of WMDs.[/quote]

You have him mixed up with someone else. There is a special forces guy that posts here but it isn’t Jeff.

Jeff is a police officer, not a soldier.

Bush is neither Hitler nor is he Gandhi.

i try to avoid political discussions these days, as its just way to easy to fling rhetoric around (“uh, why is it that no one calls Hillary a carpet-bagging neoTrotskyian liberal”, “uh, they do, kind of everyday”)

these are the main features of the bush government, as i see them.

  1. Bush is a delegate, CEO type of manager. Things like 9-11, or the bad information before the Iraq War, not concerning WMD but concerning the Iraqi political landscape, or Hurrican Katrina, are situations where the correct information was out there, but it was only possessed by certain people int he chain of command, and not by any person in full. That’s a reoccuring problem of infrastructure that apparently all the homeland security/FEMA reshuffling did not fix. Notice I’m not blaming Bush for molesting my children or for creating the designated hitter (though he did vote against the wild card when he was the Rangers president), but just that this is a partial failure that the administration doesn’t seem to concerned about.

  2. Bush is as good as the people around him. The early Cheney/Powell/Rumsfeld/Rice/Ashcroft cadre, though i disagree with their politics, were very efficient and organized at what they did. The newer group around him doesn’t have near the experience nor the sense of mission that the “Vulcans” did. There aren’t any ideological disagreements among them, but they don’t really do anything either. You hear a lot less about Gonzalez as AG than you did about Ashcroft, and likewise you don’t hear about Steven Hadley at all (that’d be Rice’s padawan/apprentice, who is now NSA advisor). Rumsfeld and Cheney seem like tired versions of their old selves, bc they have been under attack for so long. Rice is the only remaining superstar, and she might run off to be the NFL commish.

  3. Bush needs to stop saying, "well, no one could predict (Iraq’s post-war landscape/absence of WMD’s/Katrina levees breaching/the sun rising). It just makes him look dumb.

For the record, I am a libertarian type of votes Democrat usually
(voted for Voinovich, and I’m afraid to say it, Taft, but only once). Neither party has a monopoly on the answers, but it seems like a smaller faction of the Republicans shout out a lot of the political discourse. I think that for a large part, the brouhaha over Gay Marriage is a clever smokescreen/get out the vote effort to mask the more pragmatic/practical failures of this government. i think what happens when you run on moral issues but legislate on financial issues is that eventually people run out of gas when you don’t have any gay marriages to scapegoat so that your tax agenda passes the House, or so you can appoint cronies to the head of FEMA or homeland security.

sorry, that was rantlike, but wanted to see if i could steer the discussion into something useful.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
You have him mixed up with someone else. There is a special forces guy that posts here but it isn’t Jeff.

Jeff is a police officer, not a soldier.
[/quote]

Really? With his gung-ho attitude, I would have thought Jeff would be first in line to go hunt down those Iraqi WMDs. I wonder why he’s still over here, warming the bench.

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
you know, i could not stand Clinton. during his supposed “best economy ever” i was having some of the worst times of my life financially. but i did not blame him for every fucking thing that possibly pissed me off either. you guys need to grow the fuck up.

i work in the San Francisco bay area, where the population is either liberal white, or urban black. i hear some of the most stupid shit all the time. i was eavesdropping on a conversation between guys in environmental services, as they watched TV. i wish i had a notebook or a tape recorder, as i cant recite details, but i am not exaggerating, EVERY THING wrong in the entire world is Bush or Cheney’s fault. they were watching the news, and they each linked every single bad story to the current administration, hell, they managed to even comment on the commercials, finding something bad and linking it to Bush and Cheney.

fucking idiots. how in the fuck does it feel to wake up every morning and feel like you are getting ass-reamed by the all powerful evil bush cabal from the time you take your morning shit till the time you slip off your birkenstocks or timberland’s and go to bed? what a miserable life you people lead. i feel sorry for you. [/quote]

um… there’s quite a few hispanics over there in san francisco too. and a good variety of asians. which you should know if you’ve ever eaten anything in the bay area… but you don’t understand them so i suppose that’s pretty much the same as not existing.

i must admit though your point still stands as the spics and chinamen are saying the same things as the “liberal whites” and “urban blacks”.

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
if he (bush) has to take full blame when anything goes wrong, why cannot he take some of the credit when some things go right. [/quote]

only the weak, or consistently wrong NEED to take credit for something. if your not wrong 99% of the time, you won’t have to fight tooth and nail for “credit” if/when you do something right people will give the credit where it is due. as a leader if those who you have chosen fail to meet the standard that is expected of them, then you replace them. either that or their failure becomes you own. to say that most leaders are wrong most of the time anyways so it’s ok sounds foolish. seriously, does that sound right to anybody? i know that with the size of the goverment, and the different pathways information has to follow before the president ever hears about, it can easily loose it validity. if that is a problem, and leads to mistakes such as iraq would it not be wise to change that process? it would appear that self interest alone governs our nation.

p.s. what is a “leftist cheerleader”? as long as your at it, why don’t you explain the whole left/right wing thing to me.i am a little confused on which side my opinios fall.

little irish wrote:

“Big fucking deal. There’s a million threats to the US, two of which are Iran and North Korea, and both are far more dangerous than Iraq ever has been.”

If it comes to war (looks like we are heading that way) do you support the attack on iran in advance? Let’s get on the record here.

“Your post sounds nice, too bad its all bullshit. If they always had WMDs, then how come we’re trying to spread democracy now?”

9/11 + 12 years of noncompliance + harboring terrorists + paying terrorists + firing on our planes + trying to assassinate American Presidents= ATTACK IRAQ.

“I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again- you can’t change the basis for a war once you start it. This administration has done it a million times.”

Wrong. See 2002 speeches.

“No WMDs”

Not true. Found limited stockpiles plus one hell of a lot of under the table dealings/plans.

“no links to Al-Quieda”

Wrong. See saddam tapes. Funded al qaeda in phillipines, funded propaganda for bin laden, more links coming.

“no Bin Laden”

Are you saying the dems could have done better?

Wrong.

“paying for news stories”

Sad that positive stories have to be bought.

“a coming civil war”

Did we have a civil war? Did the English have a Civil War?

Is democracy flourishing in both places?

Anyone with an IQ above 0 knew that the risk was there.

“screened presidential audiences for “town halls”, a visible contempt for those who question his policies”

If this bothers you, why did you vote democratic? Hypocrite. It’s called politics.

“the PATRIOT Act”

I’d love to hear little irish’s alternatives.

“a pussy Democratic party who won’t stand up, much less stand together…”

Must feel strange having voted for them?

“Yea its been a great time since 9/11. I’m real proud of America right now.”

Do something about it. Volunteer. Stop bitching and start doing.

irish, your crap is straight dnc talking points. Have you read any of the saddam tapes? Seriously, is there a possibility that circumstances change and you could be wrong?

I guess I know the answers in advance.

JeffR

bradley,

I’m not going to re-hash my arguments with elkhntr.

I should not have brought up my role.

You are not worth discussing this with until you walk into your local police/fire station/CIA/FBI office/ NYPD Headquarters/9/11 family members homes and tell them that if they support the war and aren’t in Iraq or Afghanistan that they are “chickenhawk’s” or “are warming the bench.”

You do that, and you and I can talk. If you don’t, remember it’s you doing nothing for anyone and running your mouth ragged. If anyone is yellow, it’s you.

pox, I noticed in your desperation to deny any credit to Bush for Homeland Security, you gave credit to the members of Homeland Security.

While Bush deserves more credit than you give, the officers in Homeland Security would appreciate your praise.

Oh, I think what I do is service.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Oh, I think what I do is service.
[/quote]

That’s right, you’re head cheerleader. You’re in charge of presidential pep.

So why aren’t you in Iraq?

Anal cyst? (like Rush Limbaugh)

You have Other Priorities (like Dick Cheney)?

What’s your excuse, Rambo? Too busy patrolling the internet?

[quote]JeffR wrote:
little irish wrote:

“Big fucking deal. There’s a million threats to the US, two of which are Iran and North Korea, and both are far more dangerous than Iraq ever has been.”

If it comes to war (looks like we are heading that way) do you support the attack on iran in advance? Let’s get on the record here.

[/quote]

Depends how it comes down. I think they are far, far more dangerous than Iraq ever was, but I will make no prejudgemens. Alot can happen in a year.

Well what about Syria? Lebanon? Iran? Lots and lots of other threats out there. A list of atrocities can be made for many countries besides Iraq. This proves nothing.

Bullshit. First it was ties to 9/11, the WMDs, now we’re spreading democracy. Nothing like looking for a bright side when there clearly is none.

Just because you read it in the weekly standard doesn’t mean its true. There have been no news programs on this, no articles in the Times, and no media attention. Keep looking through those facist publications, and you’ll find lots of things that aren’t true. Try again.

Prove it with a reputable source. George hasn’t yet.

Has nothing to do with Democrats. Has everything to do with starting a war and not achieving your aims. Would WWII ever have been called a victory, or even worth it, if Hitler had gotten away?

Yea it is. Nothing like freedom of the press.

America had no interference in the Civil War from any other country, not too mention the dynamics were completely different.

The English Civil War was one monarchy fighting another. Hardly worth the lives.

Stop trying to draw parallels that aren’t there.

Agreed. But there are/were more serious ones elsewhere. Iraq is not worth it. I thought Republicans were against nation building? Or at least they were when Clinton was in office. I guess your opiniong changed when the party line did huh?

Hypocrite? Hardly. W has proven he can’t think on his feet, and its obvious that he can’t handle true policy questions without reciting the same old garbage. Rarely has a party one with such a dolt as the figurehead. I doubt it will happen again.

Funny, but certain Conservatives on this board who are not just cheerleaders don’t agree with the Patriot Act at all.

It doesn’t surprise me that you do, of course, but the fact remains that freedom is more important than safety, and giving the government too much power puts us in a boat as bad as the Muslim countries themselves.

No it doesn’t. It just is dissapointing. But the times make the men, we will see who rises.

Volunteer? Like you did? How’s Iraq treating you tough guy?

LOL. I disagree on the democrats with some issues, but not many. Maybe that’s why I vote for them - why is this strange?

You’ve never varied from Republican talking points, and you are known by everyone to be the biggest cheerleader around. So criticism by you of my opinions is not something that particularly bothers me.

[quote]swivel wrote:
heavythrower wrote:
you know, i could not stand Clinton. during his supposed “best economy ever” i was having some of the worst times of my life financially. but i did not blame him for every fucking thing that possibly pissed me off either. you guys need to grow the fuck up.

i work in the San Francisco bay area, where the population is either liberal white, or urban black. i hear some of the most stupid shit all the time. i was eavesdropping on a conversation between guys in environmental services, as they watched TV. i wish i had a notebook or a tape recorder, as i cant recite details, but i am not exaggerating, EVERY THING wrong in the entire world is Bush or Cheney’s fault. they were watching the news, and they each linked every single bad story to the current administration, hell, they managed to even comment on the commercials, finding something bad and linking it to Bush and Cheney.

fucking idiots. how in the fuck does it feel to wake up every morning and feel like you are getting ass-reamed by the all powerful evil bush cabal from the time you take your morning shit till the time you slip off your birkenstocks or timberland’s and go to bed? what a miserable life you people lead. i feel sorry for you.

um… there’s quite a few hispanics over there in san francisco too. and a good variety of asians. which you should know if you’ve ever eaten anything in the bay area… but you don’t understand them so i suppose that’s pretty much the same as not existing.

i must admit though your point still stands as the spics and chinamen are saying the same things as the “liberal whites” and “urban blacks”.

[/quote]

smoke my dick. i am Cuban American, was married to a black woman, have two kids with her, and my current girlfriend is mexican. and i ate at a pretty decent Cuban restaurant a few days ago, cha-cha-cha’s.

[quote]swivel wrote:
heavythrower wrote:
you know, i could not stand Clinton. during his supposed “best economy ever” i was having some of the worst times of my life financially. but i did not blame him for every fucking thing that possibly pissed me off either. you guys need to grow the fuck up.

i work in the San Francisco bay area, where the population is either liberal white, or urban black. i hear some of the most stupid shit all the time. i was eavesdropping on a conversation between guys in environmental services, as they hed TV. i wish i had a notebook or a tape recorder, as i cant recite details, but i am not exaggerating, EVERY THING wrong in the entire world is Bush or Cheney’s fault. they were watching the news, and they each linked every single bad story to the current administration, hell, they managed to even comment on the commercials, finding something bad and linking it to Bush and Cheney.

fucking idiots. how in the fuck does it feel to wake up every morning and feel like you are getting ass-reamed by the all powerful evil bush cabal from the time you take your morning shit till the time you slip off your birkenstocks or timberland’s and go to bed? what a miserable life you people lead. i feel sorry for you.

um… there’s quite a few hispanics over there in san francisco too. and a good variety of asians. which you should know if you’ve ever eaten anything in the bay area… but you don’t understand them so i suppose that’s pretty much the same as not existing.

i must admit though your point still stands as the spics and chinamen are saying the same things as the “liberal whites” and “urban blacks”.

[/quote]
oh, btw, the3 particular area of the bay area I work is mostly urban black. there are lots of communities that can claim to be “bay area”. dumbass.

bradley,

You and I are oil and water. I’m glad. I ask what good you are for anyone, and you respond by calling me “head cheerleader.” You are the protype democrat. Change the subject much?

Time to ask another direct question that won’t be answered: Is anyone who supports the War, the Administration, and the troops, who isn’t in the armed forces a “chicken-hawk?”

Are there exceptions?

These are direct questions. If you don’t answer them directly, then we are done talking and you prove my point.

Thanks,

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Time to ask another direct question that won’t be answered: Is anyone who supports the War, the Administration, and the troops, who isn’t in the armed forces a “chicken-hawk?”
[/quote]

Just those whose biggest “support” is mostly talk and retarded words on internet chat forums.

I love you little irish!!! You are trully a lot of fun. So angry!!!

Let’s begin!!!

“Depends how it comes down. I think they are far, far more dangerous than Iraq ever was, but I will make no prejudgemens. Alot can happen in a year.”

Nice dodge. I’m glad you don’t have to make the determination or one of those submarine missles might hit your house before you decide.

“Well what about Syria? Lebanon? Iran? Lots and lots of other threats out there. A list of atrocities can be made for many countries besides Iraq. This proves nothing.”

irish, this is probably my least favorite liberal talking point. As I understand it, your “point” is that if we don’t solve every problem at once, then we can’t solve any.

Ok, little fella, next time you talk to your doctor, make sure he/she fixes everything at once, or you are leaving.

“Don’t work on arms without working the rest of the body all the time.”

“I’m sorry, we can’t help that homeless man because there is another in Newark.”

On and on and on. That logic sucks.

“Bullshit. First it was ties to 9/11, the WMDs, now we’re spreading democracy. Nothing like looking for a bright side when there clearly is none.”

Read this: Briefing Room - The White House

Bush in 2002. If you read it, that stupid paragraph would disappear from your ramblings forever. Sadly, I’ll bet you won’t.

“Just because you read it in the weekly standard doesn’t mean its true. There have been no news programs on this, no articles in the Times, and no media attention. Keep looking through those facist publications, and you’ll find lots of things that aren’t true. Try again.”

Jesus, you are narrow. Which sources would you “trust?”

“Prove it with a reputable source. George hasn’t yet.”

I’ll play on your home turf: Here’s abc:

Oh, PLEASE TELL ME abc IS A CONSERVATIVE MOUTHPIECE!!! PLEASE!!!

If you can’t, I’ll be waiting for you to acknowledge my proof.

“Has nothing to do with Democrats. Has everything to do with starting a war and not achieving your aims. Would WWII ever have been called a victory, or even worth it, if Hitler had gotten away?”

Didn’t realize the War on Terror was over. Would you have been calling the War a failure in 1945 when we were in Berlin? “Yep, the evil democrats couldn’t win. hitler is still alive. He’s hiding in a bunker (like a cave), but we still haven’t won.”

I love you, irish.

“Yea it is. Nothing like freedom of the press.”

Doesn’t bother you that both sides aren’t being equally portrayed. Not surprised. As long as it’s to your advantage you have no problems.

“America had no interference in the Civil War from any other country,”

Really? Where was the C.S.S. Alabama built? Pray tell.

“not too mention the dynamics were completely different.”

Were they now? If memory serves, one section of the country had dominated the political landscape from 1776 - 1861. When the other part of the country began to increase in size and influence, the minority party opted to secede rather than work together.

Shiite/Sunni–Union/Confederate.

“The English Civil War was one monarchy fighting another. Hardly worth the lives.”

I hadn’t realized Cromwell was a Monarchist. Was there a Cromwell II?
I do believe he was a Parlimentarian and fought tooth and nail to stop the erosions of rights guaranteed by Magna Carta and subsequent generations.

“Stop trying to draw parallels that aren’t there.”

Thanks, little. You need to do some reading.

“Agreed. But there are/were more serious ones elsewhere. Iraq is not worth it. I thought Republicans were against nation building? Or at least they were when Clinton was in office. I guess your opiniong changed when the party line did huh?”

little, how many times does George Bush have to say that “9/11 changed everything.” I know, you don’t believe it because George said it.

“Hypocrite? Hardly. W has proven he can’t think on his feet,”

He is either an all controlling evil genius or a country bumpkin. I can’t keep track of your parties’ views. You can’t have both.

“and its obvious that he can’t handle true policy questions without reciting the same old garbage. Rarely has a party one with such a dolt as the figurehead. I doubt it will happen again.”

I hope you are wrong.

“Funny, but certain Conservatives on this board who are not just cheerleaders don’t agree with the Patriot Act at all.”

At all? I’d hazard a guess that most (if not all) have particulars that they object to. If asked, I’ll bet that they support the idea.

HEY, THAT’S A GREAT IDEA, WHY DON’T YOU ASK INSTEAD OF ASSUMING?!?

“It doesn’t surprise me that you do, of course, but the fact remains that freedom is more important than safety, and giving the government too much power puts us in a boat as bad as the Muslim countries themselves.”

The problem is that there is no free safety. Porous borders and weak intelligence, puts us at risk.

Balance. We need balance. It’s not all or nothing.

“No it doesn’t. It just is dissapointing. But the times make the men, we will see who rises.”

George Bush. Which democrat?

“Volunteer? Like you did? How’s Iraq treating you tough guy?”

Same question: Can one be a tough guy without serving in Iraq?

“You’ve never varied from Republican talking points, and you are known by everyone to be the biggest cheerleader around.”

First of all, I have been a vocal critic of W’s use of the press. Care to deny that?

Second, I trully view the dislike you/dirty harry/pox/ron33 show toward me as a sign that I am on the right track. It’s a badge of honor to be disliked by you.

“So criticism by you of my opinions is not something that particularly bothers me.”

Oh, it’s the messenger. Isn’t that one of the cardinal signs of immaturity?

You are one hell of a lot of fun, little irish.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Time to ask another direct question that won’t be answered: Is anyone who supports the War, the Administration, and the troops, who isn’t in the armed forces a “chicken-hawk?”[/quote]

A very good question Jeff, one that I doubt will be answered.

“Chearleader!Chearleader!Chearleader!”
“Chickenhawk!”
“Yellow bellied elephant!”

Whatever.

What’s funny (or not too funny, you decide) is that while many of Bush supporters have voiced disapointment with the President on certain issues, I’ve yet to hear from someone who doesn’t support Bush give him credit for ANYTHING!

I’d like to challenge our resident Bush haters to give the President credit for something. Anything. Let’s see if any of you Bush haters can sack up and be somewhat objective.

Even a Clinton hater such as myself realizes that he had some good qualities and managed to do at least do a few things right.

C’mon folks!, this is your chance to prove that you’re not left wing nutjob extremists! That you don’t just tow the liberal line while accusing conservatives of the opposite!

This should be interesting.