1 Agent Smith says that America needs a real Anti-terror DRAFT so that hundreds of thousands of red-blooded soldiers can go over there and clean some terrorist clocks!

2 Agent Jones says Saddam Hussein is a raving lunatic. Torture, what torture? Rice Krispies not fresh enough?

3 Poor Lefties, now they have nowhere to go next time they lose an election.

4 Remember the brouhaha over France banning religious symbols and garb a couple of years back? The Petulant Left still fondly imagines that their anti-Americanism means that the French are on their side. Actually, the French are on nobody's side but their own, which is why every event evincing that France isn't inhabited solely by cheese-eating surrender monkeys is greeted with shock and horror on the Left.

5 You assume that Democrats are not capable of coming up with effective anti-terrorist legislation, but the fact is you don't know what they would do because they haven't had a chance to do anything since 9/11 but sit on the sidelines where anything they say that doesn't support the Administration seems like whining. It is the worst kind of Rovian spin that only the side who can take credit for an existing war can effectively conduct any war. James Madison would turn in his grave. We need leadership that WE CAN TRUST monitoring potential terrorist activity, and DOING IT LEGALLY! Americans are tired of Cheney/Bush and their wrong guesses about mideast intelligence, their shameless deficit spending while enriching government contractors and oil companies, their wisdom of embarrassing our country in historical proportions by endorsing torture as a method of soliciting intelligence, and their poor judgement about where and how to fight the war on terrorism. That 'war' started off all right after 9/11 but after Afghanistan and the failure to capture Osama it went straight downhill as we spent billions going after another bad guy with no real connection to terrorism (and, as it turns out, no WMD and a populace whose embracing of democracy will surely mean a splintered country -- the largest segment of which will gravitate toward an Iran that is becoming a nuclear power while our our hands are tied in Iraq). Don't try to make it look like getting rid of Cheney/Bush will result in a weaker war on terrorists. It will result in a different war, for sure a smarter one, and one conducted by leadership the American people can trust. This could all have worked out better for the Right if Cheney/Bush had had the common sense to govern from the center instead of pursuing the wrong war -- a war for which they never had a popular mandate in the first place, not to mention no way to sustain a mandate after the deceptions about WMD became clear.

6 Nah! Wouldn't work with your base as a campaign slogan - "WE CAN FIGHT A WAR TOO, ONLY BETTER" ... but your welcome to try!

7 "Wouldn't work with your base..." True, a lot of the discussion now is reactive to what Bush/Cheney have done (and not done), maybe over-reactive. I wouldn't underestimate the potential support in the Democratic base (especially the urban base) for anti-terrorist legislation/action. In any case, politicians risk a lot if they try to manufacture a mandate for war, especially if they rely on deceptions (maybe including self-deceptions) to do it. What we've seen happen in the last four years is an Administration that took a strong mandate for a war on terrorism and through ineptness and overly-partisan manoevering completely shattered it and left it in disarray. It may take another terrorist attack to get that mandate back, and I can only hope we can get our leadership act together before that happens.

8 Subjective analysis of current situation is ... subjective - and at this time - no longer worth pursuing. Reference another terrorist attack - well, YOU CAN ALWAYS HOPE! ... funny thing though ... that is another one of your problems ... HOPING That's OK - you can be Howard Dean's campaign manager any day - with my blessings.

9 We are blessed to have President Bush as our commander in chief. He is trying to fight the terrorists, but the NYT, liberals, communists and islamo-facists are doing their best to defeat US.

10 >>>"It may take another terrorist attack to get that mandate back, and I can only hope we can get our leadership act together before that happens. El otro, the name of the game is preventing another attack. So far so good. But if we are ever attacked with a nuke, you can kiss the Constitution goodbye for the rest of your adult life. The resulting police state will make the Patriot Act look like anarchy. The Dems are hostage to their Leftwing, and the truth is the Leftwing doesn't even believe there is a terror threat, so it's hard to argue the Dems could do a better job fighting terror when they can't even talk about it. What you still don't understand is that this isn't a law enforcement operation. It's a war. And there is no politically correct way to win a war. Warrants are great to solve crimes after they have been committed, but they are virtually worthless to prevent attacks. Probable cause, in most cases, only exists AFTER the crime/attack has been committed. That's why the Justice Department keeps rejecting warrant applications-- because there's no probable cause. See Able Danger. And that's why our intelligence guys simply say fuck it, let's wiretap them anyway. In Iraq, cutting and running is exactly what the terrorists want us to do. Why is it that the Dems and terrorists are always on the same page? We went into Iraq to drain the swamps and to prove we aren't a paper tiger to be trifled with. It's irrelevant if you dont agree with the reasons at this point. That time is over. The fact is, we must win it, and unless Dems have a better plan, please kindly stfu.

11 Heh. It's always funny when a leftard comes on talking about how they could make everything better if only blah blah blah. Liberals are good for nothing but target practice and then fertilizer. Please please please please please, I beg of any libtard moonbat, start your revolution, because my wife says the ammo is taking up too much space and I have to do something with it.